Skip to main content

AI assistant

Sign in to chat with this filing

The assistant answers questions, extracts KPIs, and summarises risk factors directly from the filing text.

Sign up Log in

AUKING MINING LIMITED Capital/Financing Update 2025

Feb 17, 2025

64355_rns_2025-02-17_0bff3607-ee16-4c0d-aaae-b56b62ed7222.pdf

Capital/Financing Update

Open in viewer

Opens in your device viewer

Market Update

18 February 2025

Highlights

Cobalt Blue Holdings Limited

A Green Energy Exploration Company

COB Diversifies – Major Copper Project Earn in

KEY POINTS

ASX Code: COB

Commodity Exposure: Cobalt, Copper & Sulphur

Cobalt, Copper&Sulphur
Directors & Management:
Robert Biancardi
Non-Exec		 Chairman
Hugh Keller
Non-Exec Director
Joe Kaderavek
CEO & Exec Director
Kelvin Bramley
CFO &		 Company
Secretary
Capital Structure:
Ordinary Sharesat 18/02/2025: 436.7m
Unlisted options/rights: 52.0m
Market Cap(undiluted): $24m
Share Price:
Share Priceat 18/02/2025: $0.054

==> picture [157 x 148] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Broken Hill
Broken Hill
Sydney
Adelaide
EL 6622 N
EL 8143
Broken
Pyrite Hill EL 8891
Hill
Big Hill Cobalt
Railway Project
23 KM TO BROKEN HILL
BARRIER HIGHWAY
----- End of picture text -----

Cobalt Blue Holdings Limited

ACN: 614 466 607 Address: Suite 17.03, 100 Miller Street North Sydney NSW 2060 Ph: (02) 8287 0660 Website: www.cobaltblueholdings.com Email: [email protected] Social: Cobalt.Blue.Energy cobalt-blue-holdings

Corporate Rebrand

  • a Cobalt Blue Holdings Limited (ASX: COB) (‘COB’ or ‘the Company’) is pleased to announce a proposed rebrand and change of name (subject to shareholder approval) to better reflect its expanded focus across a broader range of metals. The proposed new name, Core Blue Minerals Limited, aligns with COB’s expanded focus beyond cobalt into a diversified commodity portfolio.

Earn-In Agreement for major copper project

  • a COB has entered into an Earn-in agreement (‘the Agreement’) with AuKing Mining Limited (‘AKN’) for the Halls Creek Project (the ‘Halls Creek Project’ or ‘the Project’); a large scale copper-lead-zinc-silver-gold asset with significant cobalt potential.

  • a The Agreement enables COB to leverage its extensive metallurgical, engineering, and project development expertise to drive portfolio diversification.

  • a The Halls Creek Project hosts two major deposits with existing Mineral Resource estimates containing a combined 89kt copper (Cu), 69kt lead (Pb), 326kt zinc (Zn), 9.2Moz silver (Ag) and 45koz gold (Au) including:

  • a Sandiego – Total of 4.1Mt (3.7Mt Indicated / 0.4Mt Inferred) at 1.4% Cu, 0.4% Pb, 4.2% Zn and 25g/t Ag for 56kt contained Cu, 18kt Pb, 175kt Zn, 3.3Moz Ag, and 25koz Au; and

  • a Onedin – Total of 4.8Mt (Indicated) at 0.7% Cu, 1.1% Pb, 3.1% Zn and 38g/t Ag for 33kt contained Cu, 51kt Pb, 151kt Zn, 5.9Moz Ag and 20koz Au.

  • a 96% of the total Mineral Resource tonnes are classified as Indicated.

  • a Geological modelling has highlighted substantial opportunity for high-grade extensions and or repetitions with deposits open along strike and at depth. Drilling by AKN has also intersected substantial zones of near surface oxide-transition-supergene copper mineralisation at the Onedin deposit with significant intersections including:

  • a 55.1m at 3.5% Cu, 1.2% Pb, 0.8% Zn & 103g/t Ag from 94m (AORD004) including:

    • a 16.6m at 10.2% Cu, 0.5% Pb, 1.0% Zn & 316g/t Ag from 130m

  • a 118m at 1.1% Cu, 1.6% Pb, 1.1% Zn & 52g/t Ag from 14m (AOWB03) including:

    • a 21m at 2.1% Cu & 66g/t Ag from 93m

  • a The Project is favourably located within the Kimberley region of Western Australia; just 15km southwest of Halls Creek and 320km south of Wyndham port. The area has historically supported the Nicholsons Gold Mine and the Savannah Nickel-Copper-Cobalt Mine). The Project is supported by strong logistics support, including established road and port facilities.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

1

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Commenting on the corporate rebranding and Earn-in agreement, Cobalt Blue’s Chief Executive Officer, Joe Kaderavek said: “The Cobalt Blue name no longer reflects the full scope of our business. As our technical and project development expertise uncovers new opportunities across base and precious metals, a corporate rebrand marks a key milestone. While our commitment to delivering a strong battery materials strategy remains unchanged, we are actively expanding our portfolio with high-value projects that have the potential to enhance future earnings.

The Halls Creek Project Earn-in is a transformational step, broadening our commodity exposure and strengthening our resilience against future pricing cycles. We see immense development potential at Halls Creek and are well-positioned to unlock value through complementary initiatives—including the development of Australia’s first cobalt-nickel refinery.”

Proposed Corporate Rebrand

Following the development of the ReMine+ business unit and the proposed Earn-in of the Halls Creek Project, COB has expanded its focus to include non-battery metals, extending beyond cobalt alone. Our three core business pillars remain unchanged, with the proposed Halls Creek Project Earn-in enhancing our technical and development expertise while reinforcing our long-term growth strategy.

Recognising this expanded focus, the Board of COB has endorsed a proposal to seek shareholder approval for a name change to Core Blue Minerals Limited. This transition acknowledges our diversified commodity exposure, providing economic resilience against individual metal pricing cycles. At the same time, it preserves the strong battery materials branding that is well recognised by governments, investors, and key stakeholders.

Importantly, the renaming will not impact the Company’s commitment to the Kwinana Cobalt Refinery (‘KCR’) and the Broken Hill Cobalt Project (‘BHCP’) and our partnership with Iwatani Corporation. These remain core projects for the Company, and we anticipate providing further updates, particularly on the KCR project, in 1H 2025.

The proposed name change is subject to shareholder approval, with a resolution to be included in the Notice of Meeting for a general meeting to be scheduled in Q2 2025. The Company’s ASX code will remain the same.

Halls Creek Project Earn-In Agreement

The key terms of the Agreement are as follows:

Stage 1

  • a Subject to satisfaction of certain conditions precedent including deeds of assignment and assumption being executed by relevant third parties, COB will acquire a 51% beneficial interest in the Project by issuing AKN with A$200,000 worth of COB shares (at an issue price of $0.072 – set at the same level as the recent rights issue), being 2,777,778 shares, which will be subject to escrow for a period of six months from the date of the Agreement.

  • a To retain the 51% beneficial interest COB must meet a minimum expenditure of A$500,000 by 30 June 2027.

Stage 2

  • a COB will then have the right (but not the obligation) to earn up to a 75% interest (an additional 24%) in the Project by incurring an additional A$1.5 million of expenditure on the tenements by 30 June 2028.

  • a Should AKN’s interest dilute below 10% the interest shall revert to a 1% Net Smelter Royalty (‘NSR’).

Strategic Rationale

The Halls Creek Project Earn-in provides commodity diversification, reducing exposure to cyclical lows in the global cobalt market. The low-cost entry structure of the agreement allows COB to progressively increase its beneficial interest in the Project while significantly advancing its technical development.

Crucially, the low capital intensity of the Earn-in obligations ensures COB can maintain financial flexibility, enabling the Company to pursue additional growth opportunities through ongoing business development initiatives.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

2

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

In addition, the agreement delivers the following advantages:

Diversification for Enhanced Resilience

The Halls Creek Project expands the Company’s portfolio beyond cobalt, adding copper, lead, zinc, silver, and gold to our commodity mix. This diversification enhances resilience against price volatility, creating a more balanced foundation for capital allocation and strategic planning. By reducing reliance on single-commodity cycles, the Company is strengthening its ability to adapt to market dynamics with greater agility and unlock new growth opportunities.

Figure 1 – Diversification provides financial resilience during individual commodity price cycles (Gold, copper and cobalt prices since 2016, rebased $2024. Source: Fastmarkets, Cobalt Blue Holdings).

==> picture [482 x 187] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

450
400 Copper
Cobalt
350
Gold
300
250
200
150
100
50
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Index Value (1 Jan 2016 = 100)
----- End of picture text -----

Strong Market Outlook for Key Commodities

The global outlook for copper, silver, and gold remains strong, driven by robust short- and long-term fundamentals:

  • a Copper stands out as one of the most compelling investment opportunities, benefiting from strong demand growth and constrained supply. Essentially the “metal of electrification”, copper is fundamental in traditional industrial applications as well as vital to all energy transition plans. Already in strong demand among industrialising economies, global copper consumption is expected to continue to rise because of its critical role in electrification, decarbonisation technologies, spread of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools and data centres. Meanwhile, supply is expected to remain under pressure from decades of underinvestment, declining ore grades, long project lead times, and increasing resource nationalism.

  • a Silver and gold offer additional exposure to strategic and financial metals. In the near term, falling U.S. interest rates, geopolitical uncertainty, and central bank buying provide strong tailwinds. Over the long term, rising global debt levels and growing demand for alternative stores of value are expected to further support gold’s role in financial markets.

The Halls Creek Project aligns our portfolio with long-term macroeconomic and geopolitical trends, reinforcing our position in metals that are essential to the global economy and the energy transition.

Synergies with Our Refinery and Future Feedstock Strategy

A key element of our growth strategy is the advancement of our Kwinana Cobalt Refinery, where we are actively pursuing opportunities to secure domestic feedstocks and expand our processing capabilities. The Halls Creek Project Earn-in aligns with this objective, creating the potential for integrated value chains that leverage our refining expertise and technical capabilities.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

3

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Unlocking Value through Technical Expertise

With a proven track record of technical excellence in project development and metallurgical innovation, COB is uniquely positioned to unlock the full potential of the Halls Creek Project. Our deep expertise in resource development and process optimisation will promote value creation while advancing the project efficiently. Integrating the Halls Creek Project Earn-in into our portfolio improves financial resilience, seizes market opportunities, and solidifies our business as a leading, diversified resource development company.

Halls Creek Project

The Halls Creek Project is located in the Kimberley region of Western Australia; a mature mining jurisdiction with a significant record of resource production including iron ore, mineral sands, rare earths, nickel, copper, cobalt and gold. Located 15km southwest of Halls Creek (pop. ~3,500), the project comprises two significant deposits; Sandiego and Onedin. The deposits are directly adjacent to the Great Northern Highway which connects the Project to Kununurra and Wyndham Port, respectively some 300km and 320 km north. Wyndham Port is the only deep-water port between Broome and Darwin servicing exports including crude oil, live cattle, raw mined products, scrap metal and maize from across Northern Australia and produce from the Ord River irrigation area.

Figure 2 – Halls Creek Project – regional location

==> picture [482 x 341] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

0km 100km 200km 300km
T I M O R
Kununurra
S E A
Wyndham Port
Argyle
Diamond Mine
Derby
Darwin
Savannah
Nickel-Copper
NT Nicholson’s -Cobalt Mine
Gold Mine
QLD Browns Range
Rare Earths
Brisbane Project
WA Fitzroy Crossing
SA
Perth NSW Halls Creek
Adelaide Sydney Project
Melbourne
Imagery © 2025 TerraMetrics
R E
N O
G
R T
A T
HER
N
W
H
Y
N O R T H E R N T E R R I T O R Y
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

4

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3 – Wyndham Port facilities (Source: Kimberley Ports Authority)

==> picture [482 x 264] intentionally omitted <==

Other notable projects within the region include the:

  • a Nicholsons’ Gold Mine: Located approximately 15km west of the Project area, the Nicholsons Find gold mine was owned and operated by Pantoro Limited between 2015 and 2023, producing ~30koz gold per annum.

  • a Savannah Nickel-Copper-Cobalt Mine: Located approximately 110km north of Halls Creek, the Savannah Nickel Mine was formerly operated by Panoramic Resources producing nickel-copper-cobalt concentrates which were exported via Wyndham port. Production ceased in 2024, and the project was recently acquired by Zeta Resources.

  • a Argyle Diamond Mine: Located approximately 180km northeast of Halls Creek and 110km southwest of Kununurra, The Argyle Diamond Mine was formerly operated by Rio Tinto. Over its 37-year life, the mine produced more than 865 million carats of rough diamonds—operations ceased in late 2020.

  • a Browns Range Rare Earths Project: Located approximately 160km southeast of Halls Creek, the Browns Range Project is currently being advanced through a Definitive Feasibility Study.

The Project has been subject to previous exploration by Billiton Australia Pty Ltd, Lachlan Resources NL, Anglo Australian Resources NL and AKN through various joint ventures. Since 1990, expenditure attributed to the main deposit areas totals some A$20 million providing the Company with a strong foundation upon which to advance Project development.

Mineral Resources

The Halls Creek Project is inclusive of two existing Mineral Resources including:

  • a Sandiego – 4.1Mt at 1.4% Cu, 0.4% Pb, 4.2% Zn and 25g/t Ag for 56kt contained copper, 18kt lead, 175kt zinc and 3.3Moz silver.

  • a Onedin – 4.8Mt at 0.7% Cu, 1.1% Pb, 3.1% Zn and 38g/t Ag for 33kt contained copper, 51kt lead, 151kt zinc and 5.9Moz silver.

The Mineral Resource estimates were independently prepared by ERM Australia Consultants Pty Ltd (‘ERM’, formerly CSA Global) and were originally released to ASX on 7 April 2022 by AKN.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

5

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

Table 1 – Mineral Resource estimate for the Sandiego deposit detailed by classification. Note minor rounding errors may have occurred in compilation of this table.

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Classifcation
Tonnes
(Mt)		 Grade Contained Metal
Copper
(%)
Lead
(%)
Zinc
(%)
Silver
(g/t)
Gold
(g/t)		 Copper
(kt)
Lead
(kt)
Zinc
(kt)
Silver
(Moz)
Gold
(Koz)
Sandiego(Copper zone reported at a 0.8% copper cut-off grade)
Indicated
1.7
Inferred
0.3
Sub-total
2.0		 2.3
0.2
0.8
18
0.3
1.6
–
3.0
5
0.2
2.2
0.1
1.1
16
0.3		 39.1
3.4
13.6
0.98
16.4
4.8
–
9.0
0.05
1.9
43.9
3.4
22.6
1.03
18.3
Sandiego(Zinc zone reported at a 3% zinc cut-off grade)
Indicated
2.0
Inferred
0.1
Sub-total
2.1		 0.6
0.7
7.3
35
0.1
0.2
0.1
6.1
10
0.1
0.6
0.7
7.3
34
0.1		 12.0
14.0
146.0
2.25
6.4
0.2
0.1
6.1
0.03
0.3
12.2
14.1
152.1
2.28
6.7
Total
Indicated
3.7
Inferred
0.4		 1.4
0.5
4.3
27
0.2
1.3
0.0
3.8
6
0.2		 51.1
17.4
159.6
3.23
22.8
5.0
0.1
15.1
0.08
2.2
Total
4.1		 1.4
0.4
4.2
25
0.2		 56.1
17.5
174.7
3.31
25.0

Table 2 – Mineral Resource estimate for the Onedin deposit detailed by classification. Note minor rounding errors may have occurred in compilation of this table.

Classifcation
Tonnes
(Mt)		 Grade Contained Metal
Copper
(%)
Lead
(%)
Zinc
(%)
Silver
(g/t)
Gold
(g/t)		 Copper
(kt)
Lead
(kt)
Zinc
(kt)
Silver
(Moz)
Gold
(Koz)
Onedin(Copper zone reported at a 0.4% copper cut-off grade)
Indicated
1.5		 1.1
1.2
0.6
47
0.2		 16.5
18.0
9.0
2.27
9.7
Onedin(Zinc zone reported at a 1% zinc cut-off grade)
Indicated
3.3		 0.5
1.0
4.3
34
0.1		 16.5
33.0
141.9
3.61
10.6
Total
4.8		 0.7
1.1
3.1
38
0.1		 33.0
51.0
150.9
5.88
20.3

Growth Potential

Geological modelling undertaken by AKN in support of the Sandiego and Onedin Mineral Resource estimates has substantially improved the understanding of structural controls on mineralisation. This understanding has highlighted significant opportunity for high-grade extensions and or repetitions within favourable host rocks and structures proximal to the main deposits and across the broader tenement portfolio.

Alignment with Refinery

The potential to incorporate cobalt into future Mineral Resource estimates is subject to review with significant intersections from select drill holes at the Sandiego deposit, including:

  • a 22m at 12.6% Cu, 1.3% Pb, 8.0% Zn, 0.17% Co & 121g/t Ag from 100m (SRCD031)

  • a 12.9m at 12.2% Cu, 0.1% Pb, 2.8% Zn, 0.27% Co & 37g/t Ag from 149.5m (SRCD031)

  • a 10.37m at 9.9% Cu, 0.46% Co & 19g/t Ag from 393.73m (SRCD064)

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE 6

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 4 – Sandiego deposit drilling

==> picture [482 x 574] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [482 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

7

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 5 – Sandiego deposit cross section illustrating significant cobalt intersections from SRCD031 and SRCD064

==> picture [482 x 293] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 6 – COB personnel inspecting core at the Halls Creek core storage facility (Left). High-grade oxidesupergene copper mineralisation intersected by AORD004 comprising 16.6m at 10.2% Cu, 0.46% Pb, 1.03% Zn & 316g/t Ag from 130m (core pictured at approximately 137m)

==> picture [482 x 237] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

8

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 7 – Onedin deposit drill plan

==> picture [482 x 574] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [482 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

9

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 8 – Onedin deposit cross section illustrating significant copper intersections from AORD004 and AOWB03

==> picture [482 x 294] intentionally omitted <==

Tenement Portfolio

The Project boasts an extensive tenement portfolio covering some 250km[2] with the main deposits (Sandiego and Onedin) hosted within existing Mining Leases (M 80/276 and M 80/277 respectively).

Table 3 – Halls Creek Project tenement schedule

==> picture [317 x 229] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Tenement Grant Date Expiry Date Area (km [2] )
Mining Leases
M 80/276 2/04/1989 5/04/2031 2.2
M 80/277 2/04/1989 5/04/2031 3.2
Exploration Licences
E 80/4957 11/11/2016 10/11/2026 21.2
E 80/4960 24/03/2017 23/03/2027 51.7
E 80/5076 27/11/2018 26/11/2028 22.7
E 80/5087 28/11/2018 27/11/2028 16.2
E 80/5127 27/11/2018 26/11/2028 109.8
E 80/5707 24/10/2022 23/10/2027 13.7
Prospecting Licences
P 80/1878 3/11/2022 2/11/2026 1.9
P 80/1879 3/11/2022 2/11/2026 1.8
P 80/1880 3/11/2022 2/11/2026 0.4
P 80/1881 3/11/2022 2/11/2026 1.7
P 80/1882 3/11/2022 2/11/2026 1.9
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

10

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 9 – Halls Creek tenement map

==> picture [482 x 574] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [482 x 100] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

11

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Information required under ASX Listing Rule 5.8.1

Geology and Geological Interpretation

Massive sulphide deposits at Sandiego and Onedin are hosted by the Koongie Park Formation comprising mafic and felsic volcanics, associated sediments including sandstone, mudstone, carbonate, chert and ironstone, and are intruded by rhyolitic to rhyodacitic sills, dolerite bodies and basalt dykes. Massive sulphide mineralisation is strata-bound, with disseminated sulphides overlaying the massive sulphides. Both deposits are interpreted to occur within the limbs of intensely folded, higher order, doubleplunging anticlinal structures.

The massive sulphide deposits of the Halls Creek Project are classified as Volcanogenic Massive Sulphide (‘VMS’) deposits. The mineralogy of the primary mineralisation at Sandiego is pyrite-sphalerite-pyrrhotite-chalcopyrite +/- galena, which is largely hosted in the magnetite-rich exhalative suite of rocks where it occurs as a massive conformable wedge-shaped lens 200m in length with a maximum thickness of 75m. At Onedin, sphalerite is the main sulphide in the primary mineralisation with subordinate pyrrhotite-pyrite-chalcopyrite-galena. Onedin comprises numerous stacked lenses of mineralisation with a folded and faulted geometry over a vertical extent of 400m.

Both deposits have a deep weathering profile (up to 250m below the surface), resulting in three weathering domains: an oxidised zone at the surface, a primary zone at depth, and a transition zone in between.

The geological interpretation supporting the Mineral Resource estimates was guided firstly by geology, and secondly by grade envelopes to constrain mineralisation. Zinc domains were based on nominal lower cut-off grades of 1.5 % Zn (Onedin) and 1.0 % Zn (Sandiego); copper domains were based on nominal lower cut-off grades of 0.4 % Cu (Onedin) and 0.5 % Cu (Sandiego). Internal dilution was permitted during the interpretation of the mineralisation domains, however it was limited to 3 m in most cases. Some overlap of the zinc and copper zones occurs. Weathering domains were interpreted for the Base of Complete Oxidation (‘BOCO’) and Top of Fresh (‘TOFR’) interfaces. The Onedin Mineral Resource extends along strike 300m, across strike by 200m and has a depth extent below surface of 400m. The Sandiego Mineral Resource extends along strike 300m, across strike by 200m and has a depth extent below surface of 600m.

Sampling and Sub-sampling Techniques

Sampling and sub-sampling techniques have varied between phases of exploration at the Sandiego and Onedin deposits and are summarised in Table 4 for each respective period.

Table 4 – Summary of sampling and sub-sampling techniques since 1995

==> picture [484 x 323] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Period Sampling and Sub-Sampling Techniques
Diamond Drilling
1995–1996 Diamond drilling was used to obtain core from which intervals averaging 1m in length were sawn to produce
samples (typically quarter (25%) core). These samples were crushed, split and pulverised for analysis. Details of
sub-sampling, lab preparation techniques are not recorded.
2006– 2011 Diamond drilling was used to obtain core from which intervals averaging 1m in length were sawn to produce
quarter (25%) core or half (50%) core samples from HQ or NQ core respectively. These samples were crushed, split
and pulverised to produce a sample for analysis. Details of sub-sampling and lab preparation techniques are not
recorded.
2021 Diamond drilling was used to obtain core from which intervals averaging 0.95m in length were sawn to produce
quarter (25%) core or half (50%) core samples from PQ3 / HQ3 or HQ core respectively. These samples were
crushed (passing -10mm), riffle split and pulverised (80% passing -75µm) to produce a sample for analysis.
RC Drilling
1995–1996 RC drilling was used to obtain 1m samples by means of a riffle splitter which were composited into 4m intervals
for analysis. Composite samples returning Cu, Pb or Zn >1%, and or Au >1/g/t were typically re-assayed at 1m
intervals. Details of sample compositing, sub-sampling and lab preparation techniques are not recorded.
2006–2008 RC drilling was used to obtain 4m composite samples by means of a sample ‘spear’. These samples were
crushed, split and pulverised to produce a sample for analysis. Details of sub-sampling and lab preparation
techniques are not recorded.
2010–2011 RC drilling was used to obtain 1m samples by means of a cone splitter. These samples were crushed, split and
pulverised to produce a sample for analysis. Details of sub-sampling and lab preparation techniques are not
recorded.
2021 RC drilling was used to obtain 1m samples by means of a cone splitter from which up to 3.5kg was pulverised
(80% passing -75µm) to produce a sample for analysis. Samples >3.5kg were riffle split and pulverised (80%
passing -75µm) to produce a sample for analysis.
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

12

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Drilling Techniques

The Sandiego drilling database comprises drill holes completed from 1995 including 3 diamond drill holes, 53 reverse circulation (‘RC’) drill holes and 42 diamond drill holes with RC pre-collars (‘RCDD’) of varying depths. In addition, the database includes 35 drill holes (27 diamond drill holes and 8 RC drill holes) for which no information regarding the date of drilling or details related to drilling techniques is recorded. A summary of the number of drill holes and drilling techniques since 1995 is provided in Table 5.

Table 5 – Summary of drilling techniques employed at the Sandiego deposit since 1995

==> picture [484 x 176] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

No. Drill Holes No. Metres Drilling Diameters
Year Diamond RC RCDD Total Diamond RC Total Diamond RC
1995 – 4 5 9 630.6 1,096.65 1,727.25
NQ2–HQ3 4.75–5.625”
1996 – 6 8 14 1,427.6 1,928.1 3,355.7
2006 – – 4 4 912.65 520.75 1,433.4
2008 – 22 11 33 2,289.8 5,208.4 7,498.2
NQ2–HQ2 5.25”
2010 2 11 10 23 1,220.1 3,193.9 4,414
2011 – 3 – 3 – 648 648
2021 1 7 4 12 1,742.58 1,431.33 3173.91 NQ2–HQ2 5.5”
Total 3 53 42 98 8,223.33 14,027.13 22,250.46 – –
----- End of picture text -----

The Onedin drilling database comprises drill holes completed from 1995 including 8 diamond drill holes, 41 RC drill holes and 21 diamond drill holes with RC pre-collars (‘RCDD’) of varying depths. In addition, the database includes 21 diamond drill holes for which no information regarding the date of drilling or details related to drilling techniques is recorded. A summary of the number of drill holes and drilling techniques since 1995 is provided in Table 6.

Table 6 – Summary of drilling techniques employed at the Onedin deposit since 1995

==> picture [484 x 140] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

No. Drill Holes No. Metres Drilling Diameters
Year Diamond RC RCDD Total Diamond RC Total Diamond RC
1995 – 22 10 32 759.2 3,918.9 4,678.1
NQ2–HQ3 4.75–5.625”
1996 – 5 6 11 1,004.72 1,661.08 2,665.8
2006 1 1 2 4 558.9 383.1 942
NQ2–HQ2 5.25”
2008 – 4 2 6 322.3 1,054 1,376.3
2021 7 9 1 17 1,627 1,577.7 3,204.7 HQ2/HQ3–PQ3 5.5”
Total 8 41 21 70 4,272.12 8,594.78 12,866.9 – –
----- End of picture text -----

Mineral Resource Classification

The Mineral Resource models were classified based upon drill hole spacing, quality of sampling and sample analyses, quantity of density measurements, and the relative confidence in the geological interpretation. The Mineral Resource estimates are supported by confidence in the geological interpretations, sufficient to assume geological and grade continuity to satisfy an Indicated classification. All blocks within the Onedin Mineral Resource are classified as Indicated in accordance with the JORC Code; the Sandiego Mineral Resource is classified as a combination of Indicated and Inferred.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

13

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 10 – Sandiego Mineral Resource block model looking southwest illustrating block distribution by resource classification for the respective copper and zinc zones.

==> picture [400 x 303] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [400 x 45] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 11 – Onedin Mineral Resource block model looking southwest illustrating block distribution by resource classification for the respective copper and zinc zones.

==> picture [400 x 232] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [400 x 31] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

14

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Sample Analysis Method

Sample analysis methods have varied between phases of exploration at the Sandiego and Onedin deposits are summarised in Table 7 for each respective period.

Table 7 – Summary of sample analysis methods since 1995

==> picture [484 x 242] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Period Sample Analysis Method
Diamond Drilling
1995–1996 Samples were analysed via atomic absorption spectroscopy (‘AAS’) reporting a limited and variable suite of
elements (nominally Cu, Pb, Zn and Ag). Au was variably analysed by fire assay. Details of lab digestion techniques
are not recorded.
2006– 2011 Samples were subject to mixed-acid digestion and analysis via Inductively Coupled Plasma - Mass Spectrometry
(‘ICP-MS’) or Inductively Coupled Plasma - Optical Emission Spectroscopy (‘ICP-OES’) reporting a variable suite
of elements. Au was typically analysed by fire assay using a 40–50g charge with an AAS finish.
2021 Samples were subject to mixed-acid digestion and analysis via ICP-OES for a suite of 39 elements. Au was
analysed by fire assay using a 30g charge with an AAS finish.
RC Drilling
1995–1996 Samples were analysed via AAS reporting a limited suite of elements (nominally Cu, Pb, Zn and Ag). Au was
variably analysed by fire assay.
2006–2008 Samples were subject to mixed-acid digestion and analysis via ICP-MS or ICP-OES reporting a variable suite of
elements. Au was typically analysed by fire assay using a 40–50g charge with an AAS finish.
2010–2011 Samples were subject to mixed-acid digestion and analysis via ICP-OES reporting a variable suite of elements.
Au was typically analysed by fire assay using a 50g charge with an AAS finish.
2021 Samples were subject to mixed-acid digestion and analysis via ICP-OES for a suite of 39 elements. Au was
analysed by fire assay using a 30g charge with an AAS finish.
----- End of picture text -----

Mineral Resource Estimation Methodology

A block model with block sizes 5m (X) x 10m (Y) x 10m (Z) was constructed for each deposit, with the individual blocks assigned to the local geological domains (mineralisation and weathering) and each interpolated with a Cu, Zn, Au and Ag grade. The block size adopted corresponds to approximately half the drill hole spacing. Drill samples were flagged by mineralisation and weathering domains, and the drill samples composited to 1m length intervals. Composited sample data were statistically reviewed to determine appropriate top-cuts, with top-cuts applied for Zn, Cu, Ag and Au where required. Variograms were modelled for Cu and Zn from top cut and composited sample data within their respective mineralisation domains. Low to moderate relative nugget effects were modelled across all mineralisation domains, with short ranges of approximately 50 m observed for both Zn and Cu.

Grade interpolation was caried out via Ordinary Kriging (‘OK’) for the Sandiego deposit, and via Inverse Distance Squared (‘IDS’) for the Onedin deposit. All sub-blocks were assigned the grade of their parent block. Sample search ellipse radii varied according to deposit and grade variable, with a sample search ellipse of up to 60m by 30m by 20m (perpendicular to strike) used for Cu and Zn interpolation at Sandiego, with a minimum of 8 samples and maximum of 24 samples used to interpolate grade into any one block. A maximum of 4 samples per drill hole was used for grade interpolation for each block. Search radii were increased, and the minimum number of minimum samples reduced in subsequent sample searches if cells were not interpolated in the first pass. Octant searches were not used. The interpolated grades were validated by way of review of cross sections (block model and drill samples presented with same colour legend); swath plots, and comparison of mean grades from drillhole data with block model grades.

Mineral Resource Cut-Off Grades

The Mineral Resources have been reported above Cu and Zn cut-off grades of 0.8% Cu and 3% Zn (Sandiego), and 0.4% Cu and 1% Zn (Onedin). The basis for the selection of the cut-off grades reflects the anticipated mining methods for the respective deposits, with underground operations (such as is anticipated for Sandiego) requiring higher reporting cut-off grades than would be used for an open pit Mineral Resource. The cut-off grades used to report the Sandiego Mineral Resource are the same as have been historically used for reporting earlier Mineral Resource estimates.

For both Mineral Resources, in the case of overlapping Zn and Cu zones, the Zn block grade has been preferentially reported over the Cu block grade.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE 15

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 12 – Sandiego Mineral Resource block model looking southwest illustrating block distribution by copper (left) and zinc (right) grade for the respective copper and zinc zones.

==> picture [401 x 300] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [401 x 60] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 13 – Onedin Mineral Resource block model looking southwest illustrating block distribution by copper (left) and zinc (right) grade for the respective copper and zinc zones.

==> picture [386 x 223] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [386 x 51] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

16

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Mining and Metallurgical Methods and Modifying Factors

The Halls Creek Project (inclusive of the Sandiego and Onedin Mineral Resources) was the subject of a Scoping Study completed in May 2023 (‘2023 Scoping Study’) by Wave International on behalf of AKN. The Mineral Resource estimates were independently prepared by ERM (formerly CSA Global) and were originally released to ASX on 7 April 2022 by AKN.

A summary of modifying factors considered at the time of the Mineral Resource estimation and subsequently subject to further assessment during completion of the 2023 Scoping Study is provided below.

Mining Method and Parameters

In 2022, at the time of the Mineral Resource estimation, it was anticipated that the Onedin deposit would be mined using open cut methods, while the Sandiego deposit would be mined largely as an underground operation. On that basis, different cut-off grades for the individual deposits and discrete copper and zinc zones were applied.

The mining study completed for the 2023 Scoping Study demonstrated that:

  • a the Onedin deposit is amendable to open cut mining; and

  • a the Sandiego deposit is amendable to underground mining.

Processing Method and Parameters

Anglo Australian Resources completed extensive metallurgical testwork to inform Feasibility Studies between 2008 and 2011. The testwork considered a range of mineralisation types from the Sandiego and Onedin deposits. The results of the testwork demonstrated sulphide mineralisation at Sandiego and Onedin can be concentrated at satisfactory metallurgical recoveries to produce commercial grade concentrates. Comparatively, processing of oxide-transition material was regarded as challenging.

For the purposes of the 2023 Scoping Study, the process flowsheet contemplated inclusion of a sulphidisation plant as a ‘basecase’ for treatment of oxide-transition material, while other processing methodologies were investigated. Further testwork is required to identify the most appropriate processing pathway for the oxide-transition material.

Other Material Modifying Factors

Tenure

The Sandiego and Onedin deposits are hosted within existing Mining Leases M 80/276 and M 80/277 respectively—the Mining Leases expire in 2031.

Environmental

Project development has the potential for environmental impacts caused by the generation of acid mine drainage (‘AMD’) and depletion of groundwater resources. The Sandiego and Onedin deposits comprise both sulphidic mineralisation and waste rock which has the potential to oxidise when exposed to air and water. Further characterisation of mineralised and waste material (waste rock and tailings) will be required to inform the development of a long-term closure strategy as part of future studies.

Other key environmental factors will need to be considered in future studies including though not limited to biodiversity, groundwater, surface water, air quality, social and community.

Cultural Heritage and Native Title

Mining Leases M 80/276 and M 80/277 are located within the Koongie and Lamboo Elvire Native Title Claims. The Mining Leases are unencumbered by Native Title Agreements as the tenements were granted prior to the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).

Competent Person’s Statement

The information in this report that relates to Exploration Results is based on information compiled by Mr Heath Porteous, a Competent Person who is a Member of The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (AusIMM). Mr Porteous is employed by Xploremore Pty Ltd and engaged on a full-time basis by the Group as Exploration Manager. Mr Porteous has had sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity being undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 edition of the Australasian Code for the Reporting of Exploration Results, Minerals Resources and Ore Reserves (2012 JORC Code). Mr Porteous consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

The information in this report that relates to the Mineral Resource estimates is based on, and fairly reflects, information compiled by Mr David Williams. Mr Williams (B. Sc. Hons) is a full-time employee of ERM and is a Member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists (RPGeo). Mr Williams is fully independent of Cobalt Blue Holdings Limited. David Williams has sufficient experience relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for the Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (‘JORC Code’). David Williams consents to the disclosure of the information in this report in the form and context in which it appears.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

17

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Cobalt Blue Background

Cobalt Blue is a mining and mineral processing company focussed on the development of the Halls Creek Project in Western Australia, a Cobalt-Nickel Refinery in Western Australia, the Broken Hill Cobalt Project in New South Wales and ReMine+ globally (with a view to global opportunities contained in mine waste). The Company intends to seek shareholder approval to rename the Company to Core Blue Minerals Limited.

Forward Looking Statements

This announcement contains “forward-looking statements”. All statements other than those of historical facts included in this announcement are forward-looking statements. Where the Company expresses or implies an expectation or belief as to future events or results, such expectation or belief is expressed in good faith and believed to have a reasonable basis. However, forward looking statements are subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors, which could cause actual results to differ materially from future results expressed, projected or implied by such forward-looking statements. Such risks include but are not limited to the ability to reach binding agreement on the proposed terms or at all, cobalt metal price volatility, timely completion of project milestones, funding availability, government and other third-party approvals. Readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. The Company does not undertake any obligation to release publicly any revisions to any “forward-looking statement”.

This announcement was authorised for release to the ASX by the board of Cobalt Blue Holdings Limited.

For further information, please contact:

==> picture [96 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Joe Kaderavek Chief Executive Officer Cobalt Blue Holdings P: (02) 8287 0660 [email protected]

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

18

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

JORC Code 2012 Edition – Table 1

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Sampling a_Nature and quality of sampling (e.g.,_ Sandiego – Diamond Drilling
techniques cut channels, random chips, or 1995–1996
specific specialised industry standard
measurement tools appropriate to
the minerals under investigation,		 a Diamond drilling was used to obtain core from which intervals aver-
aging 1m in length were sawn to produce samples (typically quarter
such as down hole gamma sondes, (25%) core). These samples were crushed, split and pulverised for
or handheld XRF instruments, etc). analysis via atomic absorption spectroscopy (‘AAS’) reporting a
These examples should not be taken
as limiting the broad meaning of
sampling.
a_Include reference to measures taken_
to ensure sample representivity and		 limited and variable suite of elements (nominally Cu, Pb, Zn and Ag).
Au was variably analysed by fre assay. Details of sub-sampling, lab
preparation and digestion techniques are not recorded.
2006–2011
the appropriate calibration of any a Diamond drilling was used to obtain core from which intervals
measurement tools or systems used. averaging 1m in length were sawn to produce quarter (25%) core
a_Aspects of the determination of_ or half (50%) core samples from HQ or NQ core respectively. These
mineralisation that are Material to the samples were crushed, split and pulverised to produce a sample
Public Report. for mixed-acid digestion and analysis via Inductively Coupled
a_In cases where ‘industry standard’_ Plasma – Mass Spectrometry (‘ICP-MS’) or Inductively Coupled
work has been done this would
be relatively simple (e.g., ‘reverse
circulation drilling was used to obtain
1 m samples from which 3 kg was
pulverised to produce a 30 g charge		 Plasma – Optical Emission Spectroscopy (‘ICP-OES’) reporting a
variable suite of elements. Au was typically analysed by fre assay
using a 40 - 50g charge with an AAS fnish. Details of sub-sampling
and lab preparation techniques are not recorded.
for fire assay’). In other cases, more a The remaining core was retained for archival purposes.
explanation may be required, such as
where there is coarse gold that has		 2021
inherent sampling problems. Unusual a Diamond drilling was used to obtain core from which intervals
commodities or mineralisation types averaging 0.95m in length were sawn to produce half (50%) core
(e.g., submarine nodules) may warrant
disclosure of detailed information.		 samples. These samples were crushed passing -10mm, riffe split
and pulverised to produce a sample for mixed-acid digestion and
analysis via ICP-OES for a suite of 39 elements. Au was analysed by
fre assay using a 30g charge with an AAS fnish.
a The remaining core was retained for archival purposes or
metallurgical testwork.
Sandiego – RC Drilling
1995–1996
a RC drilling was used to obtain 1m samples by means of a riffe
splitter which were composited into 4m intervals for analysis via AAS
reporting a limited suite of elements (nominally Cu, Pb, Zn and Ag).
Au was variably analysed by fre assay. Composite samples returning
Cu, Pb or Zn >1%, and or Au >1g/t were typically re-assayed at
1m intervals. Details of sample compositing, sub-sampling and lab
preparation techniques are not recorded.
2006–2008
a RC drilling was used to obtain 4m composite samples by means of a
sample ‘spear’. These samples were crushed, split and pulverised to
produce a sample for mixed-acid digestion and analysis via ICP-MS
or ICP-OES reporting a variable suite of elements. Au was typically
analysed by fre assay using a 40 - 50g charge with an AAS fnish.
Details of sub-sampling and lab preparation techniques are not
recorded.
2010–2011
a RC drilling was used to obtain 1m samples by means of a cone
splitter. These samples were crushed, split and pulverised to
produce a sample for mixed-acid digestion and analysis via ICP-OES
reporting a variable suite of elements. Au was typically analysed by
fre assay using a 50g charge with an AAS fnish. Details of sub-sam-
pling and lab preparation techniques are not recorded.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

19

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Sampling 2021
techniques a RC drilling was used to obtain 1m samples by means of a cone
(continued) splitter from which up to 3.5kg was pulverised to produce a
sample for mixed-acid digestion and analysis via ICP-OES for a
suite of 39 elements. Au was analysed by fre assay using a 30g
charge with an AAS fnish.
a Unmineralised zones were infrequently composited into 4m intervals
for analysis as described above.
Onedin – Diamond Drilling
1995–1996
a Diamond drilling was used to obtain core from which intervals aver-
aging 1m in length were sawn to produce samples (typically quarter
(25%) core). These samples were crushed, split and pulverised for
analysis via atomic absorption spectroscopy (‘AAS’) reporting a
limited and variable suite of elements (nominally Cu, Pb, Zn and Ag).
Au was variably analysed by fre assay. Details of sub-sampling, lab
preparation and digestion techniques are not recorded.
2006–2008
a Diamond drilling was used to obtain core from which intervals
averaging 1m in length were sawn to produce quarter (25%) core
or half (50%) core samples from HQ or NQ core respectively. These
samples were crushed, split and pulverised to produce a sample
for mixed-acid digestion and analysis via ICP-MS or ICP-OES
reporting a variable suite of elements. Au was typically analysed by
fre assay using a 40 - 50g charge with an AAS fnish. Details
of sub-sampling and lab preparation techniques are not recorded.
a The remaining core was retained for archival purposes.
2021
a Diamond drilling was used to obtain core from which intervals
averaging 0.96m in length were sawn to produce quarter (25%)
core or half (50%) core samples from PQ3 / HQ3 or HQ core
respectively. These samples were crushed passing -10mm, riffe
split and pulverised to produce a sample for mixed-acid digestion
and analysis via ICP-OES for a suite of 39 elements. Au was
analysed by fre assay using a 30g charge with an AAS fnish.
a The remaining core was retained for archival purposes or
metallurgical testwork.
Onedin – RC Drilling
1995–1996
a RC drilling was used to obtain 1m samples by means of a riffe
splitter which were composited into 4m intervals for analysis
via AAS reporting a limited suite of elements (nominally Cu, Pb,
Zn and Ag). Au was variably analysed by fre assay. Composite
samples returning Cu, Pb or Zn >1%, and or Au >1g/t were typi-
cally re-assayed at 1m intervals. Details of sample compositing,
sub-sampling and lab preparation techniques are not recorded.
2006–2008
a RC drilling was used to obtain 4m composite samples by means of
a sample ‘spear’. These samples were crushed, split and pulver-
ised to produce a sample for mixed-acid digestion and analysis
via ICP-MS or ICP-OES reporting a variable suite of elements.
Au was analysed by fre assay using a 40–50g charge. Details of
sub-sampling and lab preparation techniques are not recorded.
2021
a RC drilling was used to obtain 1m samples by means of a cone
splitter from which up to 3.5kg was pulverised to produce a
sample for mixed-acid digestion and analysis via ICP-OES for a
suite of 39 elements. Au was analysed by fre assay using a 30g
charge with an AAS fnish.
a Unmineralised zones were infrequently composited into 4m
intervals for analysis as described above.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

20

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Drilling a_Drill type (e.g., core, reverse_ Sandiego
techniques circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary
air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc)
and details (e.g., core diameter, triple
or standard tube, depth of diamond		 a The Sandiego drilling database comprises drill holes completed
from 1995 including 3 diamond drill holes, 53 RC drill holes and
42 diamond drill holes with RC pre-collars (‘RCDD’) of varying
tails, face-sampling bit or other type, depths. In addition, the database includes 35 drill holes (27
whether core is oriented and if so, by diamond drill holes and 8 RC drill holes) for which no information
what method, etc). regarding the date of drilling or details related to drilling techniques
is recorded.
a Between 1995 and 1996, diamond drill holes generally utilised
RC pre-collars to an average depth of 141m. Diamond tails were
typically completed using HQ3 triple tube, reducing to standard
NQ2 on intersection of competent rock. RC drilling utilised standard
hole diameters (typically 4.75 – 5.625”) though details of bit types
were not recorded. Core orientation was completed , where
possible, using a Van-Ruth Orientation device.
a Between 2006 and 2011, diamond drill holes generally utilised
RC pre-collars to an average depth of 144m. Diamond tails were
typically completed using standard HQ2. RC drilling utilised standard
hole diameters (typically 5.25”) though details of bit types were not
recorded. Core orientation surveys were undertaken as frequently as
possible (generally every 12m) though were diffcult to maintain
in broken ground. Core orientation methods were not recorded.
a During 2021, diamond drill holes generally utilised RC pre-collars
to an average depth of 120m. Diamond tails were typically
completed using standard HQ2, reducing to NQ2 to hole
completion. RC drilling utilised standard hole diameters (typically
5.5”) face-sampling bit. Core was orientated though orientation
methods were not recorded.
a The Mineral Resource block model was prepared using data
available as of 7 March 2022 using drilling completed since 1995.
Rotary Air Blast (‘RAB’) and other rotary percussion drill holes
were not used in the estimates due to a lack of documentation
supporting samples.
a Two drill holes completed in 2022 are also excluded having been
completed post completion of the estimates. These drill holes
do not intersect the mineralised domains used to constrain the
estimate and therefore are not regarded as material to the estimate.
a A summary of drill holes and drilling techniques is provided in the
following table.

==> picture [484 x 175] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

No. Drill Holes No. Metres Drilling Diameters
Year Diamond RC RCDD Total Diamond RC Total Diamond RC
1995 – 4 5 9 630.6 1,096.65 1,727.25
NQ2–HQ3 4.75–5.625”
1996 – 6 8 14 1,427.6 1,928.1 3,355.7
2006 – – 4 4 912.65 520.75 1,433.4
2008 – 22 11 33 2,289.8 5,208.4 7,498.2
NQ2–HQ2 5.25”
2010 2 11 10 23 1,220.1 3,193.9 4,414
2011 – 3 – 3 – 648 648
2021 1 7 4 12 1,742.58 1,431.33 3173.91 NQ2–HQ2 5.5”
Total 3 53 42 98 8,223.33 14,027.13 22,250.46 – –
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

21

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Drilling a_Drill type (e.g., core, reverse_ Onedin
techniques circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary
air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc)
and details (e.g., core diameter, triple
or standard tube, depth of diamond		 a The Onedin drilling database comprises drill holes completed
from 1995 including 8 diamond drill holes, 41 RC drill holes and
21 diamond drill holes with RC pre-collars (‘RCDD’) of varying
tails, face-sampling bit or other type, depths. In addition, the database includes 21 diamond drill holes
whether core is oriented and if so, by for which no information regarding the date of drilling or details
what method, etc). related to drilling techniques is recorded.
a Between 1995 and 1996, diamond drill holes generally utilised
RC pre-collars to an average depth of 154m. Diamond tails were
typically completed using HQ3 triple tube, reducing to standard
NQ2 on intersection of competent rock. RC drilling utilised
standard hole diameters (typically 4.75 – 5.625”) though details of
bit types were not recorded. Core orientation methods were not
recorded.
a Between 2006 and 2008, diamond drill holes generally utilised
RC pre-collars to an average depth of 132m. Diamond tails were
typically completed using standard HQ2 or NQ2. RC drilling
utilised standard hole diameters (typically 5.25”) though details
of bit types were not recorded. Core orientation surveys were
undertaken as frequently as possible (generally every 12m) though
were diffcult to maintain in broken ground. Core orientation
methods were not recorded.
a During 2021, diamond drill holes were typically cored from
surface using PQ3 triple tube reducing to HQ3 triple tube when
intersecting the lower contact of mineralisation. RC drilling utilised
standard hole diameters (typically 5.5”) face-sampling bit. Core
was orientated though orientation methods were not recorded.
a The Mineral Resource block model was prepared using data
available as of 7 March 2022 using drilling completed since 1995.
RAB and other rotary percussion drill holes were not used in the
estimates due to a lack of documentation supporting samples.
a Two drill holes completed in 2022 are also excluded having been
completed post completion of the estimates. These drill holes
do not intersect the mineralised domains used to constrain
the estimate and therefore are not regarded as material to the
estimate.
a A summary of drill holes and drilling techniques is provided in the
following table.

==> picture [484 x 141] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

No. Drill Holes No. Metres Drilling Diameters
Year Diamond RC RCDD Total Diamond RC Total Diamond RC
1995 – 22 10 32 759.2 3,918.9 4,678.1
NQ2–HQ3 4.75–5.625”
1996 – 5 6 11 1,004.72 1,661.08 2,665.8
2006 1 1 2 4 558.9 383.1 942
NQ2–HQ2 5.25”
2008 – 4 2 6 322.3 1,054 1,376.3
2021 7 9 1 17 1,627 1,577.7 3,204.7 HQ2/HQ3–PQ3 5.5”
Total 8 41 21 70 4,272.12 8,594.78 12,866.9 – –
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE 22

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Drill sample a_Method of recording and assessing_ Diamond Drilling
recovery core and chip sample recoveries and
results assessed.		 a Between 1995 and 1996, core recoveries were quantifed through
a_Measures taken to maximise sample_
recovery and ensure representative
nature of the samples.
a_Whether a relationship exists between_
sample recovery and grade and
whether sample bias may have		 measurement of actual core recovered versus drilled intervals.
Diamond drilling typically used a HQ3 triple tube confguration to
maximise recovery through strongly weathered rock, reducing to
standard NQ2 on intersection of competent rock. Core recoveries
are recorded for approximately 46% of metres drilled during the
respective period and averaged 99%.
occurred due to preferential loss/gain
of fine/coarse material.		 a Between 2006 and 2010, core recoveries were quantifed
through measurement of actual core recovered versus drilled
intervals. Diamond drilling typically used standard HQ2 and NQ2
confgurations with core loss generally attributed to fault zones
characterised by a high fracture frequency. Core recoveries are
recorded for approximately 91% of metres drilled during the
respective period and averaged 95%.
a During 2021, core recoveries were quantifed through measure-
ment of actual core recovered versus drilled intervals. Diamond
drilling typically used standard HQ2 / NQ2 and PQ3 / HQ3 triple
tube confgurations. Core recoveries are recorded for approxi-
mately 88% of metres drilled during the year and averaged 94%.
a No relationship between sample recovery and grade has been
observed.
RC Drilling
a Between 1995 and 1996, sample recoveries achieved by RC
drilling were typically estimated through observation of the volume
of the bulk samples. Where recorded the estimates denoted
recovery as a range between 0 and 100%. Accepting the inherent
subjectivity of the estimates, recoveries generally averaged 100%.
Estimated recoveries are recorded for approximately 65% of the
RC metres drilled during the respective period.
a Between 2006 and 2011, sample recoveries achieved by RC
drilling were estimated through observation of the volume of the
bulk samples. Where recorded the estimates denoted recovery as
a range between 0 and 100%. Accepting the inherent subjectivity
of the estimates, recoveries generally averaged 100%, however
estimates are only recorded for a relatively insignifcant (1%)
proportion of the RC metres drilled during the respective period.
a During 2021, sample recoveries achieved by RC drilling were
qualitatively assessed through observation of the volume of the
bulk samples. Quantitative estimates were not recorded, with
reports indicating recoveries were acceptable.
a No relationship between sample recovery and grade has been
observed.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE 23

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Logging a_Whether core and chip samples have_ a A qualifed geoscientist has logged all drill holes (core and chip
been geologically and geotechnically
logged to a level of detail to support
appropriate Mineral Resource
estimation, mining studies and
metallurgical studies.
a_Whether logging is qualitative or_
quantitative in nature. Core (or
costean, channel, etc) photography.
a_The total length and percentage of the_		 samples) pertaining to the reported Mineral Resources and
exploration results presented herein. The total proportion of
logging recorded in the database represents 97% of metres drilled
since 1995 (i.e., 33,968m of 35,117m). This logging has been
completed to a level of detail considered to accurately support
Mineral Resource estimation. The parameters logged include
lithology, mineralisation and oxidation. These parameters are both
qualitative and quantitative in nature.
relevant intersections logged. a All diamond drill core sampled up to 2006 was relogged by an
independent consultant from ERM Australia Consultants Pty
Ltd (‘formerly CSA Global) to ensure consistency. The same
geological logging template was used for subsequent diamond
drilling up to 2010.
a Diamond drilling completed since 2006 has typically been subject
to geotechnical logging with parameters recorded including
rock quality indices (e.g., rock quality designation (‘RQD’)) and
geotechnical defects such as fracture frequency.
a Digital core photography for drilling completed in 2021 is retained in
both wet and dry states. Core photographs from drilling completed
prior to 2021 are available in historical reports (typically in PDF
format) though the completeness of these records is unknown.
a Core which was not sampled for geochemical, geotechnical and
or metallurgical purposes is retained. The overall condition of this
core is unknown.
a Representative reference trays of chips from RC drilling completed
in 2021 have been retained. Select reference trays of chips from
RC drilling completed prior to 2021 have been retained though
the completeness of these records is unknown.
Sub-sampling a_If core, whether cut or sawn and_ Sandiego – Diamond Drilling
techniques whether quarter, half or all core taken. 1995–1996
and sample
preparation		 a_If non-core, whether riffled, tube_
sampled, rotary split, etc and whether
sampled wet or dry.		 a All core samples (NQ2 – HQ3) were sawn with quarter (25%) core
typically submitted for analysis.
a_For all sample types, the nature,_ a No second half samples were submitted for analysis.
quality and appropriateness of the a Quality Assurance and Quality Control (‘QAQC’) procedures
sample preparation technique. adopted for sub-sampling are not recorded though are expected
a_Quality control procedures adopted_ to have been undertaken in accordance with standard industry
for all sub-sampling stages to practice for the respective period.
maximise representivity of samples. 2006–2011
a_Measures taken to ensure that the_
sampling is representative of the a All core samples were sawn with quarter (25%) core or half (50%)
in-situ material collected, including
for instance results for feld duplicate/		 core typically submitted for analysis from HQ2 or NQ2 core
respectively.
second-half sampling. a No second half samples were submitted for analysis.
a_Whether sample sizes are appropriate_
to the grain size of the material being
sampled.		 a QAQC procedures adopted for sub-sampling are not recorded
though are expected to have been undertaken in accordance with
standard industry practice for the respective period.
2021
a All core samples (NQ2 – HQ2) were sawn with half (50%) core
typically submitted for analysis. These samples were crushed
(passing -10mm), riffe split and pulverised (80% passing -75µm)
to produce a sample for analysis.
a The ‘cut-line’ was observably defned with reference to the core
orientation line, typically retained on the portion of core reserved
for archival purposes. This ensured that the portion of core
selected for analysis remained generally consistent downhole.
a No second half samples were submitted for analysis.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE 24

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Sandiego – RC Drilling
1995–1996
a RC drilling was used to obtain 1m samples by means of a riffe
splitter which were composited into 4m intervals for analysis.
Composite samples returning Cu, Pb or Zn >1%, and or Au
>1g/t were typically re-assayed at 1m intervals.
a QAQC procedures adopted for sample compositing and
sub-sampling are not recorded though are expected to have been
undertaken in accordance with standard industry practice for the
respective period.
a Details of feld duplicates, if collected are not recorded.
2006–2008
a RC drilling was used to obtain 1m samples which were speared
to produce 4m composite samples for analysis.
a QAQC procedures adopted for sample compositing and
sub-sampling are not recorded though are expected to have
been undertaken in accordance with standard industry practice
for the respective period. Sub-sampling with a sample spear
to produce composite samples can introduce bias and reduce
sample representativity, particularly in heterogeneous materials,
where particle segregation and inconsistent sampling can lead
to inaccurate assay results. The composite sample intervals are
typically external of the mineralised domains and thus are not
considered to have introduced any material bias.
a Details of feld duplicates, if collected are not recorded.
2010–2011
a RC drilling was used to obtain 1m samples by means of a cone
splitter for analysis.
a QAQC procedures adopted for sample compositing and
sub-sampling are not recorded though are expected to have been
undertaken in accordance with standard industry practice for the
respective period.
a Details of feld duplicates, if collected are not recorded.
2021
a RC drilling was used to obtain 1m samples by means of a cone
splitter from which up to 3.5kg was pulverised (80% passing -75µm)
to produce a sample for analysis. Samples >3.5kg were riffe split and
pulverised (80% passing -75µm) to produce a sample for analysis.
a Unmineralised zones were infrequently composited into 4m
intervals for analysis as described above.
a Sample condition was typically recorded by means of qualitative
observation and generally designated ‘dry’, ‘damp’ or ‘wet’
samples. Records indicate samples were usually ‘dry’. Wet
samples were typically sampled using a sample spear.
a During RC drilling completed in 2021 duplicate samples were
collected at the time of drilling at an average rate of 1:100 samples.
The method used to obtain duplicate samples is not recorded.
Onedin – Diamond Drilling
1995–1996
a All core samples (NQ2 – HQ3) were sawn with quarter (25%) core
typically submitted for analysis.
a No second half samples were submitted for analysis.
a Quality Assurance and Quality Control (‘QAQC’) procedures
adopted for sub-sampling are not recorded though are expected
to have been undertaken in accordance with standard industry
practice for the respective period.
2006–2008
a All core samples were sawn with quarter (25%) core or half (50%)
core typically submitted for analysis from HQ2 or NQ2 core
respectively.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

25

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
a No second half samples were submitted for analysis.
a QAQC procedures adopted for sub-sampling are not recorded
though are expected to have been undertaken in accordance with
standard industry practice for the respective period.
2021
a All core samples were sawn with quarter (25%) core or half (50%)
core samples from PQ3 / HQ3 or HQ core respectively submitted
for analysis. These samples were crushed (passing -10mm), riffe
split and pulverised (80% passing -75µm) to produce a sample for
analysis.
a The ‘cut-line’ was observably defned with reference to the core
orientation line, typically retained on the portion of core reserved
for archival purposes. This ensured that the portion of core
selected for analysis remained generally consistent downhole.
a No second half samples were submitted for analysis.
Onedin – RC Drilling
1995–1996
a RC drilling was used to obtain 1m samples by means of a riffe
splitter which were composited into 4m intervals for analysis.
Composite samples returning Cu, Pb or Zn >1%, and or
Au >1g/t were typically re-assayed at 1m intervals.
a QAQC procedures adopted for sample compositing and sub-sampling
are not recorded though are expected to have been undertaken in
accordance with standard industry practice for the respective period.
a Details of feld duplicates, if collected are not recorded.
2006–2008
a RC drilling was used to obtain 1m samples which were speared
to produce 4m composite samples for analysis.
a QAQC procedures adopted for sample compositing and
sub-sampling are not recorded though are expected to have
been undertaken in accordance with standard industry practice
for the respective period. Sub-sampling with a sample spear
to produce composite samples can introduce bias and reduce
sample representativity, particularly in heterogeneous materials,
where particle segregation and inconsistent sampling can lead
to inaccurate assay results. The composite sample intervals are
typically external of the mineralised domains and thus are not
considered to have introduced any material bias.
a Details of feld duplicates, if collected are not recorded.
2021
a RC drilling was used to obtain 1m samples by means of a cone
splitter from which up to 3.5kg was pulverised (80% passing -75µm)
to produce a sample for analysis. Samples >3.5kg were riffe split and
pulverised (80% passing -75µm) to produce a sample for analysis.
a Unmineralised zones were infrequently composited into 4m
intervals for analysis as described above.
a Sample condition was typically recorded by means of qualitative
observation and generally designated ‘dry’, ‘damp’ or ‘wet’
samples. Records indicate samples were usually ‘dry’. Wet
samples were typically sampled using a sample spear.
a During RC drilling completed in 2021 duplicate samples were
collected at the time of drilling at an average rate of 1:100
samples. The method used to obtain duplicate samples is not
recorded. Results suggest good precision and repeatability, with
minimal variation between original and duplicate assays.
a Where recorded, the sample preparation techniques are consid-
ered to be appropriate and of suffcient quality to support Mineral
Resource estimation.
a The sample sizes submitted for analysis are considered to be
appropriate for the mineralisation grain size, texture and style.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

26

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Quality of a_The nature, quality and appropriate-_ a The nature and quality of all assaying and laboratory procedures
assay data
and laboratory
tests		 ness of the assaying and laboratory
procedures used and whether the
technique is considered partial or
total.		 employed for samples obtained through drilling (diamond and
reverse circulation) are considered ‘industry standard’ for the
respective periods.
a_For geophysical tools, spectrometers,_ 1995–1996
handheld XRF instruments, etc, the a Analysis was primarily conducted via AAS for Cu, Pb, Zn, and Ag,
parameters used in determining the with Au variably analysed by fre assay.
analysis including instrument make
and model, reading times, calibrations
factors applied and their derivation,		 a Samples were crushed, split, and pulverised before analysis;
however, details on lab preparation and digestion techniques were
etc. not recorded.
a_Nature of quality control procedures_ a AAS is a well-established method for base metals, but it is a
adopted (e.g., standards, blanks, partial digestion technique and may not completely dissolve
duplicates, external laboratory checks)
and whether acceptable levels
of accuracy (i.e. lack of bias) and		 resistant mineral phases, potentially leading to under-reporting of
some elements.
precision have been established. 2006–2011
a Analysis was primarily conducted via mixed-acid digestion
followed by ICP-MS or ICP-OES. Au was analysed by fre assay
with a 40–50g charge and AAS fnish.
a Samples were crushed, split, and pulverised; however, details of
lab preparation techniques were not recorded.
a Mixed-acid digestion is a strong, near-total digestion method
capable of dissolving most sulphide minerals but may not fully
capture elements hosted in refractory silicates.
2021
a Analysis was primarily conducted via mixed-acid digestion and
ICP-OES for a suite of 39 elements, with Au analysed by fre
assay using a 30g charge and AAS fnish.
a Samples were crushed to pass -10mm, riffe split, and pulverised
before analysis.
a The use of mixed-acid digestion and ICP-OES is appropriate
for base metals and provides near-total digestion. The reduced
Au charge (30g vs. 40–50g in previous campaigns) may slightly
impact detection accuracy but remains industry standard.
a To monitor the accuracy of assay results from drilling completed in
2021, Certifed Reference Material samples (‘CRMs’) and blanks
were inserted into the sample stream:
a
A total of 30 blank samples were inserted into the sample
sequence to monitor potential contamination. Results indi-
cated generally acceptable levels of accuracy, but instances
of contamination in high-grade zones require further review.
a
A total of 113 CRMs from Geostats Pty Ltd and OREAS
were included across 25 assay batches, covering a range
of expected copper and zinc values. Performance varied,
with multiple failures outside ±3 standard deviations (‘SD’),
particularly for zinc assays. he high failure rate, particularly in
zinc assays, raises concerns regarding systematic biases in
laboratory analysis. While some results may be attributed to
CRM misallocation, the overall frequency of failures suggests
potential issues with laboratory accuracy.
a
No umpire laboratory checks were conducted.
a The Competent Person preparing the Mineral Resource estimates
reviewed the QAQC data and determined that while sampling and
assaying results pose a low to moderate risk to confdence levels
in the Mineral Resource estimate, systematic issues with CRM
performance warrant further investigation. As such, the Company
intends to undertake a comprehensive audit of historical drilling,
sampling, sub-sampling and analytical data to inform develop-
ment of the forward work program for the Project.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

27

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Verifcation of a_The verification of significant_ a Signifcant intersections have been verifed by alternative company
sampling and
assaying		 intersections by either independent or
alternative company personnel.
a_The use of twinned holes._		 a personnel.
Validation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verifca-
tion, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols is ongoing
a_Documentation of primary data, data_
entry procedures, data verification,
data storage (physical and electronic)
protocols.		 a and forms part of the Company’s audit process (see ‘Audits or
reviews’).
The drilling database is currently managed by Newexco
a_Discuss any adjustment to assay_
data.		 Exploration; a Perth based exploration consultancy group.
All drilling data resides on their NXDB database management
system. Newexco is responsible for uploading all analytical and
other drilling data and producing audited downloaded data for
use in various mining software packages. The NXDB system has
stringent data entry validation routines.
a Twinned drilling has not yet been undertaken.
a The Company is not aware of any adjustments having been made
to assay data.
Location of a_Accuracy and quality of surveys_ a All data is recorded in the GDA2020 datum; UTM Zone 52 (MGA52).
data points used to locate drill holes (collar and
down-hole surveys), trenches, mine
workings and other locations used in
Mineral Resource estimation.		 a Local exploration grids were previously established at the
Sandiego and Onedin deposits. Detailed survey work has
previously cross-referenced the local grids to the Zone 52 MGA
a_Specification of the grid system used._ (GDA 2020) coordinate system.
a_Quality and adequacy of topographic_
control.		 a During 1995 – 1996 drill hole collars were located and surveyed
by an independent surveyor using a Trimble Global Positioning
system in Real Time Kinematic mode with a reported accuracy
of ±0.03m horizontally and ±0.05m vertically. Downhole surveys
were completed using an Eastman Downhole Camera at
approximately 50m intervals.
a The method used to survey drill collars between 2006 and 2011 is
not recorded though is expected to have been standard industry
practice for the respective periods. Downhole surveys were
typically completed at 30 – 50m intervals.
a During 2021 drill hole collars were located and surveyed using a
differential GPS (‘DGPS’). Set-up collar azimuths and inclinations
have been established using a compass and clinometer.
Downhole surveys were typically completed at 30m intervals using
a north-seeking gyroscopic tool.
a Anglo Australian Resources NL previously obtained photogram-
metric coverage of the tenement areas which provides good
control in respect of elevation data.
Data a_Data spacing for reporting of_ a Drilling at the Sandiego deposit is generally completed on
spacing and Exploration Results. sections between 20 and 40m spacing with drill holes typically
distribution a_Whether the data spacing and_ intersecting mineralisation between 30 and 40m on section.
distribution is sufficient to establish
the degree of geological and grade
continuity appropriate for the Mineral
Resource and Ore Reserve estimation		 a Drilling at the Onedin deposit is generally completed on sections
averaging 20m spacing with drill holes typically intersecting
mineralisation between 30 and 40m on section.
procedure(s) and classifications a The data spacing and distribution is suffcient to establish the
applied. degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the
a_Whether sample compositing has_ Mineral Resource estimation procedures and classifcations
been applied. applied.
a Sample compositing has been applied to select samples obtained
through RC drilling that were considered unmineralised. These
composite samples represent approximately 18% of all samples
used to inform the Mineral Resource estimates.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE 28

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Orientation of a_Whether the orientation of sampling_ a The Sandiego deposit was drilled towards 115°, and the Onedin
data in relation achieves unbiased sampling of possible deposit drilled towards 140°, both at angles ranging from –50° to
to geological
structure		 structures and the extent to which this
is known, considering the deposit type.		 –90° (typically -60°) to intersect the mineralised zones as close to
perpendicular as possible.
a_If the relationship between the drilling_
orientation and the orientation of key
mineralised structures is considered		 a The orientation of both RC and diamond drillholes at Sandiego
and Onedin is orthogonal to the perceived strike of mineralisation
to have introduced a sampling bias,
this should be assessed and reported		 and limits the amount of geological bias in drill sampling as much
as possible.
if material.
Sample a_The measures taken to ensure sample_ a Sample security procedures are considered to be ‘industry
security security. standard’ for the respective periods.
a Samples obtained during drilling completed in 2021 were
transported from Halls Creek to the laboratory by an independent
local courier service.
a The Company considers that risks associated with sample
security are limited given the nature of the targeted mineralisation.
Audits or a_The results of any audits or reviews of_ a All diamond drill core sampled up to 2006 was relogged by an
reviews sampling techniques and data. independent consultant from ERM Australia Consultants Pty Ltd
(‘formerly CSA Global) to ensure consistency.
a No audits or reviews are understood to have been carried out for
any of the previous sampling programmes.
a The Company intends to undertake a comprehensive audit of
historical drilling, sampling, sub-sampling and analytical data to
inform development of the forward work program for the Project.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE 29

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Mineral a_Type, reference name/number,_ a The Sandiego and Onedin deposits are hosted within existing
tenement and
land tenure
status		 location and ownership including
agreements or material issues with
third parties such as joint ventures,
partnerships, overriding royalties,		 a Mining Leases M 80/276 and M 80/277 respectively—the Mining
Leases expire in 2031.
The Mining Leases are located 25km and 17km southwest of
native title interests, historical sites, Halls Creek township and approximately 300km south-southwest
wilderness or national park and of Kununurra, WA.
environmental settings. a The Onedin deposit is located approximately 1.8km north north-
a_The security of the tenure held at_
the time of reporting along with any
known impediments to obtaining a
licence to operate in the area.		 east of the Lamboo Gunian Aboriginal community. The Sandiego
deposit is located approximately 6km southwest of the Lamboo
Gunian Aboriginal community.
a The Sandiego and Onedin deposits are located adjacent to the
Great Northern Highway.
a Both mining licences M80/277 and M80/276 were granted in
1989 and therefore prior to the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) (‘NTA’)
The Koongie-Elvire Native Title Claim WC 1999/040 was also
registered after grant of the mining licences and they are not
subject to the future act provisions under the NTA.
a The Project is located approximately 100km southwest of the
nearest National Park, being the Purnululu National Park.
a There are two existing agreements with respect to the Project, the
‘Precious Metals Agreement’ and the ‘Royalty Agreement’. The
Precious Metals Agreement is between AKN and Astral Resources
NL (‘Astral’) who has the right to carry out exploration for gold and
platinum group element minerals on the Project, excluding the two
Mining Leases where the Onedin and Sandiego deposits are situated
and E80/4957 where the Emull deposit is located. The Royalty
Agreement provides for a 1% net smelter return royalty payable to
Astral in the event of mining activities commencing at the Project.
a Pursuant to this announcement, the Project is subject to an
Earn-in agreement between the Company and AKN. Details of the
agreement are outlined in the main body of this announcement.
a The Company is not aware of any impediments to obtaining a
licence to operate in the area.
Exploration a_Acknowledgment and appraisal of_ a The Project area has been explored for base and precious metals
done by other exploration by other parties. on an intermittent basis since 1972.
parties a All exploration is considered to have been completed to a reason-
able standard however documentation pertaining to historical
drilling, sampling, sub-sampling and analytical data is incomplete.
Where suffcient confdence cannot be established as to data
quality, it cannot be used to inform Mineral Resource estimation.
Notwithstanding this the cumulative advancement of geological
knowledge provided by historical exploration is signifcant.
a A summary of historical exploration is provided below:
a
1972–1977:Kennecott pegged tenements over known
copper-lead-zinc-silver gossans as part of its Gordon Downs
3 project. Work included geological and structural mapping,
rock chip and soil sampling, diamond and percussion drilling.
This work outlined signifcant base metal mineralisation
hosted by chert, banded iron formations and carbonate-rich
assemblages at Onedin, Sandiego, Hanging Tree and Gosford.
Drilling immediately followed at these four prospects, with 29
RC holes with diamond tails, with the most signifcant deposit
defned from this work at Sandiego.
a
1978–1979:Newmont continued testing the known mineralisa-
tion, using extensive trenching, percussion and diamond drilling,
detailed geophysics including ground magnetic surveys and
low-level aeromagnetic surveys, which failed to locate signifcant
extensions of the mineralisation in the known prospects.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

30

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Exploration a
1980:NorthBroken Hill concentrated on testing the super-
done by other gene enriched zone at the base at Sandiego.
parties
(continued)		 a
1983–1988:Asarco Australia Ltd carried out RAB drilling in the
Mimosa sub-member, along strike of the known mineralisation,
locating several signifcant geochemical anomalies, although
not of suffcient grade to support a Mineral Resource estimate.
The drilling was to fxed depth and only the bottom of the hole
was sampled.
Asarco also completed limited work on the supergene gold
and base metal potential at Sandiego.
a
1988–1989:BP Minerals and RTZ Mining went into a joint
venture (JV) with Asarco and continued testing the gold
potential by re-assaying split core samples for gold, which
did not identify any signifcant base metal mineralisation. RTZ
Mining sold the property to AAR in 1989.
a
1989–1994:Billiton Australia and Anglo Australian Resources
NL (‘AAR’) identifed extensions of known mineralisation
at Onedin. Billiton carried out a broad-based exploration
programme including limited RC and diamond drilling.
A grade-tonnage estimate for the Onedin was prepared,
for 1 Mt @ 11 % Zn, 1 % Cu and 1 % Pb.
a
1995–2002:Lachlan Resources and AAR concentrated on
identifying shallow resources at Sandiego and Onedin with
percussion and diamond drilling programmes. Two polygonal
Mineral Resources were estimated for Sandiego in 1996
and 1997.
AAR was sole tenure holder of the properties between
2002 and 2020. AAR drilled 245 RC and diamond drillholes
encompassing 50,417 m, focusing on Mineral Resource,
metallurgical and geotechnical drilling at the Sandiego and
Onedin base metal deposits. Since 2011, AAR has focused
on gold exploration, with little exploration for base metals
occurring on the property. AAR reported Mineral Resources for
Onedin in 2006, 2008 and 2009.
a
2021:AKN’s Joint Venture Agreement with AAR commenced
in June 2021 and AKN assumed management and control
of the exploration activities on the property with additional
drilling completed in 2021 and 2022. AKN completed Mineral
Resource estimates for the Sandiego and Onedin deposits in
2022 and delivered a Scoping Study in 2023.
Geology a_Deposit type, geological setting, and_ a Rocks of the Halls Creek Project are assigned to the Lamboo
style of mineralisation. Province, of Palaeoproterozoic age (1910–1805 Ma), which
formed within the northeast trending Halls Creek Orogen.
a The Central Zone of the Lamboo Province comprises turbiditic
metasedimentary and mafc volcanic and volcaniclastic rocks of
the Tickalara Metamorphics, deposited by 1865 Ma. These rocks
were intruded by tonalitic sheets and deformed and metamor-
phosed between 1865–1856 Ma and 1850–1845 Ma.
a A younger succession of rocks comprising the sedimentary rocks
and mafc and felsic volcanic rocks of the Koongie Park Formation
(‘KPF’) were deposited in a possible rifted arc setting at around
1843 Ma. Layered mafc-ultramafc bodies were intruded into the
Central Zone at 1856 Ma, 1845 Ma and 1830 Ma. Large volumes
of granite and gabbro of the Sally Downs Supersuite intruded the
Central Zone during the Halls Creek Orogeny at 1835–1805 Ma.
Researchers interpret the Central Zone to be an arc-like domain
developed on a continental fragment.
a The KPF within the Project area is broadly characterised as a
low metamorphic-grade sequence composed of mafc and felsic
volcanics and associated sedimentary facies including sandstone,
mudstone, carbonate, chert and ironstone intruded by rhyolitic to
rhyodacitic sills, dolerite bodies and basalt dykes.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

31

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
a The KPF hosts numerous base metal occurrences and two
signifcant base metal deposits, Onedin and Sandiego.
a The upper unit of the KPF composes felsic volcanic units,
carbonate, ironstone, chert, mudstone, quartz-bearing volcan-
iclastic beds and lithic sandstone. Currently known base metal
prospects are concentrated in the upper KPF (i.e., the trend which
includes Sandiego and Onedin deposits).
a Both, the Sandiego and Onedin deposits are situated within the
limbs of intensely folded, higher order, double-plunging anticlinal
structures that have been interpreted from magnetic images.
The axial planes of the fold structures appear to be upright to
south-southeast dipping. They trend northeast, sub-parallel to
the regional transcurrent and anastomosing fault systems that
dominate the Halls Creek Orogen
a The massive sulphide deposits of the Project have been
traditionally classifed as volcanogenic massive sulphide (‘VMS’)
deposits. A PhD study concluded in 2002 proposed that the
best model for the base metal occurrence is as a sub-horizontal
basin foor replacement VMS. ERM concurs and considers the
weight of evidence supports their interpretation as VMS deposits.
Thus, the deposits are interpreted to have been formed around
the time of deposition of the host volcanic and sedimentary
strata in which they are bound and generally in bedding parallel
lenses. Hydrothermal fuids associated with volcanic activity are
interpreted to have been the source of the metals and other
constituents of the mineralisation.
a Sphalerite is the main sulphide in the primary mineralisation at
Onedin with subordinate pyrrhotite-pyrite-chalcopyrite-galena.
Sphalerite chiefy occurs as fne-grained masses. In general, the
sulphides exhibit replacement textures and show evidence of
mobilisation, which is a result of deformation and metamorphism
subsequent to initial formation.
a The mineralogy of the primary mineralisation at Sandiego is
pyrite-sphalerite-pyrrhotite-chalcopyrite ± galena, which is largely
hosted in the magnetite-rich exhalative suite of rocks where it
occurs as a massive conformable wedge-shaped lens 200 m in
length with a maximum thickness of 75 m. Weak to moderate
sulphide vein and stringer mineralisation occur at the base of the
exhalite package in the underlying tuffs. Mineralisation is relatively
rare in the carbonate zone but may extend into the talc-chlorite
schists. Overall, there is poor spatial correlation between copper
and zinc mineralisation at Sandiego. However, discrete zinc-rich
and copper-rich zones have been identifed from core logging and
assay results in the vertical dimension.
a The KPF exhibits a deep weathered profle at Sandiego and
particularly Onedin, resulting in three weathering domains –
oxidised zone at surface, primary zone at depth, and the transition
zone in between. Each zone has very different mineral assem-
blages and consequently very different metallurgical properties.
a The oxidised zone consists of completely oxidised material, above
the base of complete oxidation (‘BOCO’) surface. This surface
is on average about 100 m below ground level. It is undulating
and deepens signifcantly in the vicinity of steeply dipping faults.
Gossans are developed at surface above the mineral deposits.
a The transition zone consists of partially oxidised material and
is located between BOCO and the top of fresh rock (‘TOFR’).
Supergene mineralisation is comprised of secondary mineralisa-
tion hosted in the oxidised and transition zones.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE 32

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Drill hole a_A summary of all information material_ a See drill hole summary below. All coordinates are reported in the
Information to the understanding of the explo- GDA2020 datum; UTM Zone 52 (MGA52).
ration results including a tabulation
of the following information for all
Material drill holes:
a easting and northing of the drill
hole collar
a elevation or RL (Reduced Level
– elevation above sea level in
metres) of the drill hole collar
a dip and azimuth of the hole
a down hole length and interception
depth
a hole length.
a_If the exclusion of this information_
is justified on the basis that the
information is not Material and this
exclusion does not detract from the
understanding of the report, the
Competent Person should clearly
explain why this is the case.

==> picture [484 x 412] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Hole ID Easting Northing RL Max Depth (m) Hole Type Dip Azimuth Year Deposit
SRC01 339741.8 7968471.4 422.6 100.00 RC -60 113.7 1995 Sandiego
SRC02 339768.4 7968330.2 424.9 100.00 RC -61 113.7 1995 Sandiego
SRC06 339696.8 7968403.7 419.5 129.50 RC -61 114.7 1995 Sandiego
SRC09 339704.2 7968271.4 418.9 131.00 RC -60 113.7 1995 Sandiego
SRCD03 339757.4 7968421.1 426.1 184.00 RCDD -60 113.7 1995 Sandiego
SRCD04 339717.1 7968438.5 421.2 307.75 RCDD -60 113.7 1995 Sandiego
SRCD05 339748.5 7968381.5 423.8 193.90 RCDD -60 113.7 1995 Sandiego
SRCD07 339681.6 7968368.2 417.5 393.70 RCDD -60 113.7 1995 Sandiego
SRCD08 339721.4 7968306.7 419.6 187.50 RCDD -60 114.7 1995 Sandiego
SRC11 339645.0 7968385.6 418.3 46.00 RC -60 113.7 1996 Sandiego
SRC12 339667.5 7968287.1 418.9 196.00 RC -58 107.7 1996 Sandiego
SRC17 339812.6 7968661.0 421.6 102.00 RC -55 113.7 1996 Sandiego
SRC18 339764.3 7968507.1 423.2 119.00 RC -60 113.7 1996 Sandiego
SRC19 339726.9 7968523.1 421.0 168.00 RC -60 113.7 1996 Sandiego
SRC20 339779.6 7968543.6 425.0 96.00 RC -60 117.7 1996 Sandiego
SRCD01 339741.8 7968471.4 424.0 303.70 RCDD -60 113.7 1996 Sandiego
SRCD10 339691.8 7968386.1 419.9 208.90 RCDD -60 113.7 1996 Sandiego
SRCD11A 339646.7 7968384.0 418.0 429.80 RCDD -61 113.7 1996 Sandiego
SRCD11B 339645.0 7968386.4 418.0 494.80 RCDD -61 107.7 1996 Sandiego
SRCD13 339631.6 7968303.4 418.4 217.90 RCDD -58 107.7 1996 Sandiego
SRCD14 339715.1 7968396.1 420.6 280.30 RCDD -58 113.7 1996 Sandiego
SRCD15 339675.9 7968455.3 418.3 369.80 RCDD -58 107.7 1996 Sandiego
SRCD16 339597.6 7968318.0 418.0 323.50 RCDD -58 116.7 1996 Sandiego
SRCD21 339697.8 7968406.6 420.1 366.00 RCDD -58 113.7 2006 Sandiego
SRCD22 339660.6 7968421.2 418.7 440.70 RCDD -58 113.7 2006 Sandiego
SRCD23 339692.1 7968539.7 418.7 294.00 RCDD -60 113.7 2006 Sandiego
SRCD24 339699.2 7968408.8 420.2 332.70 RCDD -52 113.7 2006 Sandiego
SRC026 339577.2 7968328.7 418.1 265.00 RC -60 115.8 2008 Sandiego
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE 33

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [484 x 678] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Hole ID Easting Northing RL Max Depth (m) Hole Type Dip Azimuth Year Deposit
SRC027 339667.0 7968332.7 418.7 162.00 RC -60 115.8 2008 Sandiego
SRC028 339648.8 7968342.0 418.5 204.00 RC -60 115.8 2008 Sandiego
SRC029 339700.2 7968362.7 419.7 144.00 RC -60 115.8 2008 Sandiego
SRC033 339656.5 7968555.9 418.0 252.00 RC -60 115.8 2008 Sandiego
SRC034 339724.6 7968613.9 418.4 180.00 RC -60 115.8 2008 Sandiego
SRC035 339738.4 7968564.4 419.3 222.00 RC -60 115.8 2008 Sandiego
SRC036 339759.6 7968642.3 419.6 138.00 RC -60 115.8 2008 Sandiego
SRC037 339798.1 7968582.5 423.8 120.00 RC -60 115.8 2008 Sandiego
SRC038 339774.7 7968675.9 419.1 102.00 RC -63 115.8 2008 Sandiego
SRC039 339792.0 7968712.0 419.2 216.00 RC -62 111.0 2008 Sandiego
SRC040 339835.1 7968742.1 419.6 94.00 RC -60 110.0 2008 Sandiego
SRC041 339539.4 7968341.8 418.0 301.00 RC -60 110.0 2008 Sandiego
SRC043 339941.7 7968910.3 416.0 103.00 RC -60 290.0 2008 Sandiego
SRC044 339978.1 7968894.3 416.0 103.00 RC -60 293.6 2008 Sandiego
SRC045 340014.5 7968878.3 417.0 103.00 RC -60 293.6 2008 Sandiego
SRC046 339925.0 7968873.5 417.0 103.00 RC -60 293.6 2008 Sandiego
SRC047 339961.9 7968857.6 417.0 103.00 RC -60 293.6 2008 Sandiego
SRC048 339909.5 7968837.0 420.0 103.00 RC -60 293.6 2008 Sandiego
SRC049 339945.8 7968821.0 420.0 103.00 RC -60 293.6 2008 Sandiego
SRC050 339857.0 7968816.3 418.0 103.00 RC -60 293.6 2008 Sandiego
SRC051 339893.3 7968800.3 419.0 103.00 RC -60 293.6 2008 Sandiego
SRCD025 339631.7 7968305.1 418.5 450.60 RCDD -61 113.4 2008 Sandiego
SRCD027A 339668.2 7968332.1 418.7 312.90 RCDD -56 114.2 2008 Sandiego
SRCD028A 339648.0 7968340.9 418.5 360.70 RCDD -60 109.8 2008 Sandiego
SRCD029A 339699.7 7968361.6 419.7 252.80 RCDD -58 112.8 2008 Sandiego
SRCD030 339650.8 7968382.6 418.8 357.70 RCDD -60 115.8 2008 Sandiego
SRCD031 339750.8 7968427.2 425.3 224.00 RCDD -60 115.8 2008 Sandiego
SRCD032 339685.5 7968499.7 418.2 339.40 RCDD -60 115.8 2008 Sandiego
SRCD042 339591.4 7968410.0 421.0 649.50 RCDD -61 111.2 2008 Sandiego
SRCD052 339638.7 7968477.3 423.0 403.50 RCDD -60 115.8 2008 Sandiego
SRCD053A 339608.4 7968446.4 422.0 557.00 RCDD -60 115.8 2008 Sandiego
SRCD054 339704.2 7968579.4 419.0 264.50 RCDD -60 115.8 2008 Sandiego
SRC056 339685.2 7968279.2 420.0 160.00 RC -58 115.8 2010 Sandiego
SRC057 339701.5 7968315.8 421.0 208.00 RC -58 115.8 2010 Sandiego
SRC060 339725.5 7968371.1 423.0 204.00 RC -60 115.8 2010 Sandiego
SRC061 339731.9 7968390.4 424.0 200.00 RC -58 115.8 2010 Sandiego
SRC062 339728.6 7968432.8 424.0 204.00 RC -55 115.8 2010 Sandiego
SRC065 339767.2 7968464.1 427.0 168.00 RC -60 115.8 2010 Sandiego
SRC066 339746.2 7968515.5 423.0 180.00 RC -58 115.8 2010 Sandiego
SRC067 339762.1 7968552.3 423.0 150.00 RC -58 115.8 2010 Sandiego
SRC068 339778.1 7968588.5 423.0 160.00 RC -60 115.8 2010 Sandiego
SRC076 339744.2 7968405.1 425.0 180.00 RC -58 115.8 2010 Sandiego
SRC077 339753.5 7968442.2 427.0 180.00 RC -58 115.8 2010 Sandiego
SRCD058 339727.7 7968326.2 422.0 142.20 RCDD -58 115.8 2010 Sandiego
SRCD059 339707.8 7968378.9 421.0 276.00 RCDD -58 115.8 2010 Sandiego
SRCD063 339999.6 7968316.0 419.0 346.70 RCDD -60 295.8 2010 Sandiego
SRCD064 340050.1 7968293.9 418.0 450.60 RCDD -60 295.8 2010 Sandiego
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

34

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [484 x 680] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Hole ID Easting Northing RL Max Depth (m) Hole Type Dip Azimuth Year Deposit
SRCD069 339924.6 7968750.5 424.0 27.10 DD -60 157.8 2010 Sandiego
SRCD070 339928.9 7968740.9 425.0 27.10 DD -60 157.8 2010 Sandiego
SRCD071 339901.6 7968665.4 429.0 51.00 RCDD -60 115.8 2010 Sandiego
SRCD072 339877.7 7968566.7 431.0 66.00 RCDD -60 115.8 2010 Sandiego
SRCD073 339852.7 7968468.4 430.0 81.10 RCDD -60 115.8 2010 Sandiego
SRCD074 339830.8 7968368.8 428.0 90.30 RCDD -60 115.8 2010 Sandiego
SRCD075 339811.0 7968289.9 423.0 111.30 RCDD -60 115.8 2010 Sandiego
SRCD078 340095.5 7968274.0 417.0 750.60 RCDD -65 295.8 2010 Sandiego
SRC079 340020.6 7968348.5 416.0 228.00 RC -65 295.8 2011 Sandiego
SRC080 340017.7 7968391.8 420.0 220.00 RC -65 295.7 2011 Sandiego
SRC081 340013.6 7968440.8 419.0 200.00 RC -64 295.7 2011 Sandiego
ASRC001 339826.7 7968189.9 419.2 158.00 RC -65 296.8 2021 Sandiego
ASRC002 339648.0 7968032.1 419.5 210.00 RC -59 292.5 2021 Sandiego
ASRD001 339950.2 7968229.7 418.3 120.53 RC -60 295.1 2021 Sandiego
ASRD002 340033.0 7968215.3 417.4 218.60 RCDD -61 291.5 2021 Sandiego
ASRD002A 340033.0 7968215.3 417.4 621.51 DD -61 291.5 2021 Sandiego
ASRD003 339957.4 7968247.8 418.3 436.50 RCDD -65 292.9 2021 Sandiego
ASRD004 340012.0 7968289.1 417.8 549.00 RCDD -66 294.6 2021 Sandiego
ASRD005 339996.9 7968339.6 418.1 531.70 RCDD -65 292.2 2021 Sandiego
ASRD006 339979.9 7968195.7 417.9 120.00 RC -67 293.9 2021 Sandiego
ASRD007 340010.9 7968264.7 417.7 120.00 RC -65 292.4 2021 Sandiego
ASWB01 340144.3 7969049.4 415.2 102.00 RC -90 0.0 2021 Sandiego
ASWB02 339640.2 7968301.9 418.5 120.00 RC -90 0.0 2021 Sandiego
ORC03 345747.0 7973564.3 446.0 100.00 RC -61 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORC04 345722.2 7973595.2 445.8 142.00 RC -61 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORC05 345716.0 7973539.6 446.1 151.00 RC -61 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORC07 345746.8 7973501.4 452.1 124.00 RC -61 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORC08 345764.5 7973477.2 456.9 100.00 RC -61 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORC09 345684.7 7973514.1 445.9 151.00 RC -61 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORC14 345764.6 7973605.3 446.5 70.00 RC -61 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORC15 345777.7 7973589.7 446.5 60.00 RC -61 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORC16 345783.9 7973645.8 447.3 96.00 RC -61 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORC17 345796.3 7973630.6 447.4 70.00 RC -61 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORC18 345760.1 7973675.1 452.0 119.00 RC -61 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORC19 345780.6 7973617.9 447.0 70.00 RC -61 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORC20 345767.8 7973633.1 446.9 96.00 RC -61 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORC21 345754.6 7973648.7 447.3 114.00 RC -62 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORC22 345759.8 7973548.2 446.4 96.00 RC -62 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORC23 345648.2 7973433.3 449.3 96.00 RC -62 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORC24 345679.9 7973457.8 448.9 120.00 RC -62 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORC25 345710.8 7973483.2 450.8 102.00 RC -62 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORC29 345573.1 7973525.3 444.5 149.00 RC -62 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORC30 345623.3 7973463.7 444.1 203.00 RC -62 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORC32 345637.6 7973633.8 445.3 173.00 RC -60 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORCD01 345750.9 7973619.5 446.6 158.00 RC -61 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORCD02 345727.3 7973650.9 446.9 158.10 RCDD -61 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORCD06 345690.9 7973570.6 445.0 192.70 RCDD -61 140.2 1995 Onedin
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE 35

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [484 x 666] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Hole ID Easting Northing RL Max Depth (m) Hole Type Dip Azimuth Year Deposit
ORCD10 345659.6 7973544.7 444.5 202.40 RCDD -61 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORCD11 345654.2 7973488.9 444.8 177.80 RCDD -61 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORCD12 345628.8 7973519.4 444.2 225.60 RCDD -61 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORCD13 345697.1 7973626.2 446.3 201.70 RCDD -61 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORCD26 345633.0 7973576.4 444.8 258.80 RCDD -62 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORCD27 345665.7 7973601.9 445.5 224.70 RCDD -62 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORCD28 345602.4 7973551.0 444.3 288.40 RCDD -62 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORCD31 345598.2 7973494.3 443.2 265.00 RCDD -62 140.2 1995 Onedin
ORC35 345549.9 7973554.9 443.7 178.00 RC -62 140.2 1996 Onedin
ORC39 345621.8 7973749.5 448.1 144.00 RC -60 140.2 1996 Onedin
ORC40 346097.1 7974053.7 447.8 100.00 RC -60 140.2 1996 Onedin
ORC41 345846.9 7973754.1 448.7 96.00 RC -60 140.2 1996 Onedin
ORC43 345786.2 7973701.7 448.2 119.00 RC -60 140.2 1996 Onedin
ORCD29A 345569.4 7973528.1 442.6 361.60 RCDD -65 140.2 1996 Onedin
ORCD33 345583.9 7973636.6 446.2 348.40 RCDD -62 140.2 1996 Onedin
ORCD34 345552.0 7973611.9 447.8 441.90 RCDD -65 140.2 1996 Onedin
ORCD36 345671.2 7973657.9 444.1 263.30 RCDD -62 140.2 1996 Onedin
ORCD37 345567.3 7973468.0 445.6 315.80 RCDD -62 140.2 1996 Onedin
ORCD38 345440.7 7973335.3 439.8 297.80 RCDD -58 133.2 1996 Onedin
ORCD45 345759.4 7973549.1 448.0 398.70 DD -60 227.0 2006 Onedin
ORCD46 345731.5 7973708.5 453.0 192.50 RCDD -60 137.0 2006 Onedin
ORCD47 345700.3 7973682.4 452.0 224.80 RCDD -60 137.0 2006 Onedin
ORCD48 345593.3 7973437.4 445.0 126.00 RC -60 137.0 2006 Onedin
ORC049 345633.4 7973445.9 450.0 79.00 RC -60 53.3 2008 Onedin
ORC052 345458.0 7973300.2 439.7 301.00 RC -60 53.3 2008 Onedin
ORC053 345574.8 7973523.8 444.3 199.00 RC -60 143.3 2008 Onedin
ORC054 345573.7 7973587.8 444.8 205.00 RC -60 143.3 2008 Onedin
ORCD050 345604.0 7973421.3 444.8 234.70 RCDD -60 53.3 2008 Onedin
ORCD051 345557.8 7973383.0 443.0 357.60 RCDD -60 53.3 2008 Onedin
AORC001 345651.5 7973459.7 446.4 192.00 RC -60 139.1 2021 Onedin
AORC002 345680.6 7973488.2 446.7 138.00 RC -63 141.0 2021 Onedin
AORC003 345709.0 7973517.4 447.0 138.00 RC -61 142.8 2021 Onedin
AORC004 345720.2 7973566.5 445.6 174.00 RC -61 138.7 2021 Onedin
AORC005 345651.7 7973619.9 446.1 358.50 RCDD -70 138.4 2021 Onedin
AORC006 345597.4 7973464.3 442.5 278.00 RC -60 141.8 2021 Onedin
AORD001 345685.5 7973549.8 445.0 155.00 DD -60 139.7 2021 Onedin
AORD002 345660.1 7973516.6 444.3 174.80 DD -60 139.8 2021 Onedin
AORD003 345638.0 7973477.8 444.3 215.30 DD -67 140.5 2021 Onedin
AORD004 345696.9 7973601.8 445.7 196.20 DD -60 139.1 2021 Onedin
AORD005 345613.7 7973516.2 443.9 268.00 DD -63 139.7 2021 Onedin
AORD006 345630.6 7973546.4 444.5 243.80 DD -60 140.4 2021 Onedin
AORD007 345662.0 7973572.2 445.0 183.10 DD -60 139.4 2021 Onedin
AOWB01 345604.0 7973421.2 444.9 114.00 RC -90 0.0 2021 Onedin
AOWB02 345820.8 7973630.0 448.0 120.00 RC -90 0.0 2021 Onedin
AOWB03 345716.7 7973544.6 445.9 132.00 RC -90 0.0 2021 Onedin
AOWB04 345721.7 7973539.6 446.2 126.00 RC -90 0.0 2021 Onedin
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

36

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Data a_In reporting Exploration Results,_ a Drill hole intercept grades are reported as downhole length-
aggregation
methods		 weighting averaging techniques,
maximum and/or minimum grade
truncations (e.g., cutting of high
grades) and cut-off grades are usually		 a weighted averages, ensuring each sample contributes
proportionally to the fnal reported grade.
Length-weighted averages were calculated using the standard
Material and should be stated. industry formula:
a_Where aggregate intercepts_ Weighted Average Grade =
incorporate short lengths of high- (L1× G1) + (L2× G2) + (Ln× Gn) / L1+ L2+ Ln
grade results and longer lengths of
low-grade results, the procedure
used for such aggregation should be		 where L is the sample interval length and G is the corresponding
grade.
stated and some typical examples of
such aggregations should be shown
in detail.		 Example:For an interval comprising 4 metres at 2.0% Cu and
6 metres at 3.0% Cu, the weighted average grade is:
a_The assumptions used for any_ (4 × 2.0) + (6 × 3.0) / 4 + 6 = 2.6% Cu
reporting of metal equivalent values
should be clearly stated.		 a
A nominal cut-off grade of 500 ppm Co was applied for
reporting signifcant cobalt intercepts at the Sandiego
deposit. Intervals meeting or exceeding this threshold were
included in the reported aggregation. Internal dilution within
aggregated intervals did not exceed 1 metre.
a
A nominal cut-off grade of 0.4% Cu was applied for reporting
signifcant copper intercepts at the Onedin deposit. Due to the
complex nature of mineralisation, where copper is interspersed
with zinc, internal dilution was generally accepted. However,
consecutive internal dilution within aggregated intercepts did
not exceed 12 metres.
a
Within low-grade intervals reported at the 0.4% Cu cut-off,
high-grade sub-intervals were identifed using a 1.0% Cu
cut-off. Internal dilution was assessed within the geological
context of copper-zinc mineralisation, with consecutive internal
dilution in high-grade sub-intervals limited to 2 metres.
a
Reported intercepts were aggregated using a hierarchical
approach, frst identifying broader mineralised intervals at
the lower cut-off grade (e.g., 0.4% Cu), and then defning
high-grade sub-intervals at the 1.0% Cu threshold.
a
This methodology ensures that signifcant high-grade
zones are reported within broader mineralised envelopes,
maintaining geological and economic relevance.
a
Internal dilution was minimised, and where included, was
subject to constraints based on geological continuity and
mineralisation style.
Relationship a_These relationships are particularly_ a The geometry of mineralisation with respect to the drill hole
between
mineralisation		 important in the reporting of
Exploration Results.		 intersections reported from the Sandiego deposit is well estab-
lished and thus estimated true widths are provided, in addition to
widths and a_If the geometry of the mineralisation_ downhole lengths, in the table below.
intercept
lengths		 with respect to the drill hole angle is
known, its nature should be reported.
a_If it is not known and only the down_
hole lengths are reported, there
should be a clear statement to this		 a At the Onedin deposit, true widths of mineralisation through the
oxide-transition zone are diffcult to establish due to the extensive
oxidation profle creating diffuse mineralisation patterns that
complicate the interpretation of mineralisation geometry. Thus,
effect (e.g., ‘down hole length, true only downhole lengths are reported.
width not known’).

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE 37

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [484 x 205] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Downhole
Interval Estimated True Width From To Cu Pb Zn Co Ag
Hole ID (m) (m) (m) (m) (%) (%) (%) (%) (g/t)
Onedin Deposit
AORD004 55.1 True Width Not Known 94 149.1 3.5 1.2 0.8 – 103
including 10.4 True Width Not Known 99.6 110 1.2 2.7 1.3 – 4
and 16.6 True Width Not Known 130 146.6 10.2 0.5 1.0 – 316
AOWB03 118 True Width Not Known 14 132 1.1 1.6 1.1 – 52
including 25 True Width Not Known 58 83 1.2 1.5 1.2 – –
and 21 True Width Not Known 93 114 2.1 – – – 66
Sandiego Deposit
SRCD031 22 9.5 100 122 12.6 1.3 8.0 0.17 121
and 12.9 4.4 149.5 162.4 12.2 0.1 2.8 0.27 37
SRCD064 10.37 7.2 393.73 404.1 9.9 – – 0.46 19
----- End of picture text -----

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Diagrams a_Appropriate maps and sections (with_ a Appropriate maps and diagrams are presented in the body of this
scales) and tabulations of intercepts announcement.
should be included for any significant
discovery being reported These
should include, but not be limited to a
plan view of drill hole collar locations
and appropriate sectional views.
Balanced a_Where comprehensive reporting of all_ a Only mineralised drill hole intersections regarded as highly
reporting Exploration Results is not practicable,
representative reporting of both low
and high grades and/or widths should
be practiced to avoid misleading
reporting of Exploration Results.		 anomalous and of economic interest are reported. The proportion
of each hole represented by the reported intervals can be ascer-
tained from the sum of the reported intervals divided by the total
drill hole depth.
a All assay results for drill holes included in the Mineral Resources
estimates have been considered and comprise results not
necessarily regarded as anomalous.
Other substan- a_Other exploration data, if meaningful_ a Density measurements were taken from 1,197 diamond core
tive exploration
data		 and material, should be reported
including (but not limited to):
geological observations; geophysical
survey results; geochemical survey
results; bulk samples – size and
method of treatment; metallurgical
test results; bulk density, groundwater,		 billets (Sandiego) and 459 billets (Onedin) over the life of the
project. Samples were selected from every 1 m or 5 m downhole.
Density measurements were carried out by feld staff at the Halls
Creek sample yard. During AAR’s ownership, core billets were
initially wrapped in cling flm, and density was determined using
a conventional sample weight in air and then water. Samples
geotechnical and rock characteristics; with measured density values of >4.7 were discarded from the
potential deleterious or contaminating density database as these were considered too high for the style
substances. of mineralisation.
Further work a_The nature and scale of planned_ a The Company intends to undertake a comprehensive audit of
further work (e.g., tests for lateral
extensions or depth extensions or
large-scale step-out drilling).		 historical drilling, sampling, sub-sampling and analytical data to
inform development of the forward work program for the Project.
The nature and scale of planned further work will not be known
a_Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas_
of possible extensions, including		 until this audit has been completed.
the main geological interpretations
and future drilling areas, provided
this information is not commercially
sensitive.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE 38

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources - Onedin

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Database a_Measures taken to ensure that_ a Drill data is captured in a relational database prepared and
integrity data has not been corrupted by,
for example, transcription or keying
errors, between its initial collection
and its use for Mineral Resource
estimation purposes.
a_Data validation procedures used._		 a maintained by Newexco, which contains relevant information
for drill hole collars, drill samples, assays, down hole surveys
and density data. Other information also provided relates to
soil sampling, termite mound sampling, structural geology and
magnetic susceptibility.
All drilling data resides on Newexco’s NXDB database management
system. Newexco is responsible for uploading all analytical and
other drilling data and producing audited downloaded data for use in
various mining software packages. The NXDB system has stringent
data entry validation routines.
a Drill hole data tables were imported into Datamine software by CSA
Global during the preparation of the Mineral Resource estimates.
Minor issues were resolved by AuKing and Newxco prior to CSA
Global progressing with the Mineral Resource estimates.
a The Competent Person considers the database integrity to be
appropriate to support the reporting of a Mineral Resource.
Site Visits a_Comment on any site visits under-_ a The Competent Person (Mineral Resources) has not visited the
taken by the Competent Person and Halls Creek project. Travel restrictions imposed by the W.A.
the outcome of those visits. government in response to the Covid-19 pandemic prevented
a_If no site visits have been undertaken_ travel into the state at that time.
indicate why this is the case. a Alternate personnel from CSA Global visited the site during 2006
aspart of managing the drilling programme. The CSA geologists
carried out daily inspections of the drilling rig and associated
sampling equipment, supervised the sampling programmes,
geologically logged all RC hips and diamond core, including
relogging of historical drill samples, and geologically mapped
the project area.
a All work conducted was to industry standards and the Competent
Person is satisfed all geological work carried out can be used to
support the Mineral Resource.
Geological a_Confidence in (or conversely, the_ a The Competent Person regards the geological understanding of
Interpretation uncertainty of ) the geological interpre- the Onedin deposit to be of a high standard, with regards to the
tation of the mineral deposit. quantity and quality of drill sampling and geophysics supporting
a_Nature of the data used and of any_ the geological interpretations.
assumptions made. a Surface geological mapping and geological logs of diamond drill
a_The effect, if any, of alternative_
interpretations on Mineral Resource
estimation.		 core, and RC chips, along with sample assays were all used to
assist with the geological interpretation.
a_The use of geology in guiding_
and controlling Mineral Resource
estimation.		 a Alternative interpretations were not considered, with the interpreta-
tion used considered to best represent the geological knowledge
of the deposit.
a_The factors affecting continuity both of_ a The geological models control the interpolation of the grades into the
grade and geology. resource model to prevent smearing of grades into the country rock.
a Mineralisation is hosted within both the weathered and fresh rock
profles, and the continuity is determined by the proto-mineralogy
within the supergene profle, and lithology and structural controls
within the primary rock profle.
a Supergene mineralisation at Onedin is well developed as the
bulk of former primary mineralisation is located in the oxidised
and transition zones. In particular, copper seems especially prone
to supergene enrichment as refected by the range of secondary
copper minerals recorded at Onedin. Lead is also relatively
enriched in gossans above the TOFR surface.
a The bulk of primary mineralisation is associated with the
carbonate zone. There is also a strong structural control on
mineralisation, and it appears to be concentrated in the core and
limbs of the fold structure with some degree of remobilization.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE 39

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Geological a The geological interpretation was guided frstly by geology, and
Interpretation secondly by grade envelopes to constrain mineralisation. Zinc
(continued) domains were based upon a lower cut-off grade of 1.5 % Zn,
and below the TOFR interface; copper domains were based upon
a lower cut-off of 0.4 % Cu. Internal dilution was permitted during
the interpretation of the mineralisation domains. Some overlap of
the zinc and copper zones occurs.
Dimensions a_The extent and variability of the_ a The Onedin Mineral Resource extends along strike 300 m, across
Mineral Resource expressed as
length (along strike or otherwise), plan		 strike by 200 m and has a depth extent below surface of 400 m.
width, and depth below surface to the
upper and lower limits of the Mineral
Resource.
Estimation a_The nature and appropriateness_ a Datamine Studio was used for the geological modelling,
and Modelling
Techniques		 of the estimation technique(s)
applied and key assumptions,
including treatment of extreme grade
values, domaining, interpolation		 block model construction, grade interpolation and validation.
GeoAccess Professional and Snowden Supervisor software
were used for geostatistical analyses.
parameters and maximum distance a A block model with block sizes 5 m (X) x 10 m (Y) x 10 m (Z)
of extrapolation from data points. If a was constructed. Sub-celling was used. The block sizes are
computer assisted estimation method approximately half the tightest drill spacing. Blocks were fagged
was chosen include a description of
computer software and parameters
used.		 a according to the weathering and mineralisation envelopes.
Drill sample data were fagged by the mineralisation and
a_The availability of check estimates,
_previous estimates and/or mine
production records and whether the		 weathering domain envelopes, with variables MZONE and
WEATH used. Drillholes were sampled at 1 m intervals and
the drill samples were accordingly composited to 1 m lengths.
Mineral Resource estimate takes Composited sample data were statistically reviewed to determine
appropriate account of such data. appropriate top-cuts, with top-cuts applied for Zn, Cu, Pb,
a_The assumptions made regarding_ Ag and Au where required. Log probability plots were used to
recovery of by-products. determine the top-cuts, and the very high-grade samples were
a_Estimation of deleterious elements_ reviewed in Datamine by the Competent Person to determine if
or other non-grade variables of they were clustered with other high-grade samples.
economic significance (eg sulphur for
acid mine drainage characterisation).		 a Grades interpolated were Cu, Zn, Au, Ag, Co, Mo, Sb, As, S and Fe.
a_In the case of block model interpo-
_lation, the block size in relation to		 a Sample populations were split by the Cu and Zn mineralisation
domains, as supported by a statistical analysis of assay data.
the average sample spacing and the a The composited drill samples were input into variogram modelling.
search employed. Downhole and directional variograms were modelled for Zn and
a_Any assumptions behind modelling of_ Cu within the combined mineralisation domains and by weath-
selective mining units. ering profle. Moderate relative nugget effects were modelled, with
a_Any assumptions about correlation_ short ranges approximately 50 m for Zn and Cu.
between variables.
a_Description of how the geological_
interpretation was used to control the
resource estimates.
a_Discussion of basis for using or not_
using grade cutting or capping.
a_The process of validation, the_
checking process used, the
comparison of model data to drill hole
data, and use of reconciliation data if
available.		 a Grade interpolation used Inverse Distance squared (IDS) for the
grade variables. All subblocks were assigned the grade of their
parent block. Cell discretisation was used in each estimate. A
sample search ellipse of 100 m by 100 m by 30 m (perpendicular to
strike) was used, with a minimum of 8 samples and maximum of 24
samples used to interpolate grade into any one block. A maximum
of 4 samples per drill hole was used for grade interpolation. Search
radii were increased, and the minimum number of minimum
samples reduced in subsequent sample searches if cells were
not interpolated in the frst pass. Octant searches were not used.
a Grades were estimated into the waste domains using IDS.
a The Mineral Resource was an update of the 2008 Mineral
Resource estimate, with additional drill holes incorporated.
a The interpolated grades were validated by way of review of
cross sections (block model and drill samples presented with
same colour legend); swath plots, and comparison of mean
grades from drillhole data with block model grades.
a The Competent Person considers the procedures used to construct
the block model and interpolate grades are appropriate for the style
of mineralisation and refect industry accepted practices.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

40

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Moisture a_Whether the tonnages are estimated_ a Tonnages are estimated on a dry basis.
on a dry basis or with natural mois-
ture, and the method of determination
of the moisture content.
Cut-off a_The basis of the adopted cut-off_ a The Onedin Mineral Resource is reported above a cut-off grade
parameters grade(s) or quality parameters applied. of 1 % Zn for the Zn and Mixed Zn-Cu zones, and above a cut-off
of 0.4 % Cu for the Cu zone. The cut-off grades are considered
suitable by the Competent Person for the method of mining
considered to be appropriate for Onedin.
Mining factors a_Assumptions made regarding_ a Previous owners of the Project, Anglo Australian Resources (AAR)
or assump- possible mining methods, minimum commissioned a preliminary mining assessment of the Sandiego
tions mining dimensions and internal (or, if
applicable, external) mining dilution.
It is always necessary as part of the
process of determining reasonable
prospects for eventual economic
extraction to consider potential		 and Onedin deposits. This study established 2 potential mining
operations: Underground only at both Sandiego and Onedin;
and an open pit operation at Onedin. No major mining problems
were identifed in this study, however, further work was subject to
metallurgical recoveries.
mining methods, but the assumptions a In 2008 internal mining study work by AAR focussed on
made regarding mining methods underground mining of the sulphide and transition zones at
and parameters when estimating
Mineral Resources may not always
be rigorous. Where this is the case,
this should be reported with an
explanation of the basis of the mining
assumptions made.		 Sandiego, with construction of a 500 tpa processing plant (using
fotation technologies) with a 4–5-year operating life with Onedin
development having the capacity to extend project life to 8 years
mining Sandiego transition and sulphide ore. A conceptual study
was also completed on open pit mining of Onedin based on
conceptual metallurgical recoveries.
a No further mining studies for Onedin have been completed to date.
Metallurgical a_The basis for assumptions or_ a Signifcant metallurgical testwork has been undertaken on the
factors or predictions regarding metallurgical Halls Creek deposits by various explorers since the 1970’s. Early
assumptions amenability. It is always necessary as
part of the process of determining
reasonable prospects for eventual
economic extraction to consider
potential metallurgical methods,
but the assumptions regarding
metallurgical treatment processes
and parameters made when reporting
Mineral Resources may not always be		 work was effectively superseded by a major metallurgical testwork
campaign undertaken by AAR from 2006. The metallurgical
testwork established that saleable copper and zinc concentrates
could be produced from the sulphide mineralisation at Sandiego
and Onedin but work on the transitional material (using conven-
tional fotation techniques) was challenging. The 2007 testwork
included 96 metallurgical sample tests on different ore types from
Onedin and Sandiego to underpin a mineral processing fowsheet
rigorous. Where this is the case, this for economic study work.
should be reported with an explana-
tion of the basis of the metallurgical
assumptions made.		 a In 2009, AAR commissioned a review of the more than
300 metallurgical tests that had then been completed over the
various ore-types at Sandiego and Onedin, with a focus on the
application of fotation recovery techniques. This studyconcluded:
The metallurgy of the Sandiego transition and primaryzones,
whilst complex, is amenable to established fotation technology.
The Onedin primary zone is amenable to the same fotation
technology and can be processed through the same plant with
minor modifcations. The Onedin transition zone contains most of
it’s value in the form of zinc oxide minerals and is not amenable to
conventional fotation recovery but extraction by hydrometallurgy
is possible. The Onedin oxide zone contains copper in the
form of malachite which may be amenable to hydrometallurgy.
Conventional fotation fowsheets were designed for processing
the Onedin and Sandiego sulphide mineralisation. Project
economics are very sensitive to metal recoveries and the grade of
concentrate achieved. The O’Brien study recommended: Further
testwork focussed on being as near to actual plant operating
conditions as possible. Further testwork should encompass a
continuous pilot scale test facility.
a AAR engaged several metallurgical/mineral processing specialists
to review the possibilities of implementing novel treatment
processes to treat the problematic transitional and oxide ores of
Halls Creek during period 2009 to 2012. Meaningful trials recom-
mended were not implemented. No further metallurgical test work
was undertaken since 2012, before the recent commencement
by AKN of its initial metallurgical testwork program on the Onedin
oxide and transitional ores.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

41

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Environmental a_Assumptions made regarding possible_ a The project is not located in an environmentally sensitive area.
factors or
assumptions		 waste and process residue disposal
options. It is always necessary as
part of the process of determining
reasonable prospects for eventual		 Several scoping studies have been undertaken, with no major
environmental or other factors identifed which would prevent the
project from proceeding.
economic extraction to consider the a It has been assumed that environmental factors can be effectively
potential environmental impacts of managed to allow the project to be bought into production.
the mining and processing operation.
While at this stage the determination
of potential environmental impacts,
particularly for a greenfields project,
may not always be well advanced,		 a Anthropological, ethnographic surveys and environmental surveys
have been undertaken prior to surface disturbance associated
with exploration activities, with clearance being achieved over
the majority of the deposit footprints. Identifed sites have been
the status of early consideration of placed in the public record.
these potential environmental impacts
should be reported. Where these
aspects have not been considered
this should be reported with an
explanation of the environmental
assumptions made.
Bulk Density a_Whether assumed or determined. If_ a The method for density measurements is discussed in Section 2
assumed, the basis for the assump-
tions. If determined, the method used,
whether wet or dry, the frequency
of the measurements, the nature,		 a “Reporting of Exploration Results’.
Diamond core billets from earlier drilling programmes were
wrapped in cling flm prior to immersion in water to prevent flling
size and representativeness of the of cavities with water.
samples. a A drill hole fle was generated in Datamine capturing the density
a_The bulk density for bulk material must_ data, and this drill fle was fagged by weathering and minerali-
have been measured by methods
that adequately account for void
spaces (vugs, porosity, etc), moisture
and differences between rock and
alteration zones within the deposit.
a_Discuss assumptions for bulk density_		 sation domain in the same manner as the drill hole assays. The
fagged density population was statistically analysed, with average
density values determined for each mineralisation zone within
each weathering zone. The following density values were applied
per combination of domain:
estimates used in the evaluation a Oxide zone: Zn zone (Density = 2.31 t/m3); Cu zone (2.25);
process of the different materials. Overlap zone (2.73)
a Transitional zone: Zn zone (2.52); Cu zone (2.61); Overlap zone (2.82)
a Fresh zone: Zn zone (3.15); Cu zone (2.98); Overlap zone (3.05)
a The Competent Person considers the procedures used to
measure sample bulk density, and the density values assigned
to the Mineral Resource, are appropriate for the style of
mineralisation.
Classifcation a_The basis for the classification of_ a The Mineral Resource has been classifed following due consider-
the Mineral Resources into varying ation of all criteria contained in Section 1, Section 2 and Section 3
confidence categories. of JORC 2012 Table 1.
a_Whether appropriate account has_
been taken of all relevant factors (ie
relative confidence in tonnage/grade
estimations, reliability of input data,
confidence in continuity of geology
and metal values, quality, quantity and		 a The Mineral Resources were classifed based upon drill hole
spacing, quality of sampling and sample analyses, quantity of
density measurements, and the relative confdence in the geological
interpretation. This Mineral Resource is supported by a high level
of confdence in the geological interpretations, suffcient to assume
distribution of the data). geological and grade continuity to satisfy an Indicated classifcation.
a_Whether the result appropriately_
reflects the Competent Person’s view
of the deposit.		 a
a		 All blocks within the Onedin Mineral Resource are classifed as
Indicated (RESCAT = 2).
Waste blocks are recorded as unclassifed (RESCAT=4).
a The fnal classifcation strategy and results appropriately refect
the Competent Person’s view of the deposit.
Audits or a_The results of any audits or reviews of_ a The Mineral Resource estimate was internally peer reviewed by CSA
Reviews Mineral Resource estimates. Global. CSA Global reviewed the data collection, QAQC, geological
modelling, statistical analyses, grade interpolation, density measure-
ments and resource classifcation strategies. The Competent Person
relies upon the opinions of the peer reviewers when classifying the
Mineral Resource, and is satisfed that the reviews were impartial
and provided useful critique where necessary.
a No other audits or reviews are known to have occurred.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE

42

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Discussion a_Where appropriate a statement of the_ a Relevant tonnages and grade above nominated cut-off grades
of relative relative accuracy and confidence level for Cu and Zn are provided in the CSA Global (now ERM) Mineral
accuracy /
confdence		 in the Mineral Resource estimate using
an approach or procedure deemed
appropriate by the Competent Person.
For example, the application of
statistical or geostatistical procedures		 Resource report. Tonnages were calculated by fltering all blocks
above the cut-off grade and sub-setting the resultant data into
bins by mineralisation domain. The volumes of all the collated
blocks were multiplied by the dry density value to derive the
to quantify the relative accuracy of tonnages.
the resource within stated confidence
limits, or, if such an approach is not
deemed appropriate, a qualitative		 a The Mineral Resource is a local estimate, whereby the drill hole
data was geologically domained above nominated cut-off grades.
discussion of the factors that could a The Mineral Resource does not provide a calculated tonnage and
affect the relative accuracy and grade, rather it provides the reader with estimated ‘median’ values
confidence of the estimate. about which can be inferred a range based upon the resource
a_The statement should specify_ classifcation.
whether it relates to global or local
estimates, and, if local, state the
relevant tonnages, which should be
relevant to technical and economic
evaluation. Documentation should
include assumptions made and the
procedures used.
a_These statements of relative accuracy_
and confidence of the estimate should
be compared with production data,
where available.

Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources – Sandiego

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Database a_Measures taken to ensure that_ a Drill data is captured in a relational database prepared and
integrity data has not been corrupted by,
for example, transcription or keying
errors, between its initial collection
and its use for Mineral Resource
estimation purposes.
a_Data validation procedures used._		 a maintained by Newxco Exploration, which contains relevant
information for drill hole collars, drill samples, assays, down hole
surveys and density data. Other information also provided relates
to soil sampling, termite mound sampling, structural geology and
magnetic susceptibility.
Drill hole data tables were imported into Datamine software by CSA
Global during the preparation of the Mineral Resource estimates.
Minor issues were resolved by AuKing and Newxco prior to CSA
Global progressing with the Mineral Resource estimates.
a The Competent Person considers the database integrity to be
appropriate to support the reporting of a Mineral Resource.
Site Visits a_Comment on any site visits under-_ a The Competent Person (Mineral Resources) has not visited the
taken by the Competent Person and Halls Creek project. Travel restrictions imposed by the W.A.
the outcome of those visits. government in response to the Covid-19 pandemic prevented
a_If no site visits have been undertaken_ travel into the state at that time.
indicate why this is the case. a Alternate personnel from CSA Global visited site during 2006 as
part of managing the drilling programme. The CSA geologists
carried out daily inspections of the drilling rig and associated
sampling equipment, supervised the sampling programmes,
geologically logged all RC hips and diamond core, including
relogging of historical drill samples, and geologically mapped
the project area.
a All work conducted was to industry standards and the Competent
Person is satisfed all geological work carried out can be used to
support the Mineral Resource.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE 43

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Geological a_Confidence in (or conversely, the_ a The Competent Person regards the geological understanding of
Interpretation uncertainty of ) the geological interpre-
tation of the mineral deposit.		 the Sandiego deposit to be of a high standard, with regards to the
quantity and quality of drill sampling and geophysics supporting
a_Nature of the data used and of any_ the geological interpretations.
assumptions made.
a_The effect, if any, of alternative_
interpretations on Mineral Resource
estimation.		 a Surface geological mapping and geological logs of diamond drill
core, and RC chips, along with sample assays were all used to
assist with the geological interpretation.
a_The use of geology in guiding_
and controlling Mineral Resource		 a Alternative interpretations were not considered, with the
interpretation used considered to best represent the geological
estimation. knowledge of the deposit.
a_The factors affecting continuity both of_ a The geological models control the interpolation of the grades
grade and geology. into the resource model to prevent smearing of grades into the
country rock.
a Mineralisation is hosted within both the weathered and fresh rock
profles, and the continuity is determined by the proto-mineralogy
within the supergene profle, and lithology and structural controls
within the primary rock profle.
a Supergene mineralisation at Sandiego is well developed as the
bulk of former primary mineralisation is located in the oxidised
and transition zones. In particular, copper seems especially prone
to supergene enrichment as refected by the range of secondary
copper minerals recorded at Sandiego.
a The bulk of primary mineralisation is associated with the
carbonate zone. There is also a strong structural control on
mineralisation, and it appears to be concentrated in the core and
limbs of the fold structure with some degree of remobilization.
a The geological interpretation was guided frstly by geology, and
secondly by grade envelopes to constrain mineralisation. Zinc
domains were based upon a lower cut-off grade of 1 % Zn; copper
domains were based upon a lower cut-off of 0.5 % Cu. Internal
dilution was permitted during the interpretation of the mineralisation
domains. Some overlap of the zinc and copper zones occurs.
a Three zones of copper mineralisation were modelled, and two
Zn domains were modelled.
a Geological interpretations and 3D models were provided by
AuKing prior to preparation of the Mineral Resource.
Dimensions a_The extent and variability of the_ a The Sandiego Mineral Resource extends along strike 300 m,
Mineral Resource expressed as
length (along strike or otherwise), plan		 across strike by 200 m and has a depth extent below surface
of 600 m.
width, and depth below surface to the
upper and lower limits of the Mineral
Resource.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE 44

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Estimation a_The nature and appropriateness_ a Datamine Studio was used for the geological modelling,
and Modelling
Techniques		 of the estimation technique(s)
applied and key assumptions,
including treatment of extreme grade
values, domaining, interpolation		 block model construction, grade interpolation and validation.
GeoAccess Professional and Snowden Supervisor software
were used for geostatistical analyses.
parameters and maximum distance a A block model with block sizes 5 m (X) x 10 m (Y) x 10 m (Z)
of extrapolation from data points. If a was constructed. Sub-celling was used. The block sizes are
computer assisted estimation method approximately half the tightest drill spacing. Blocks were fagged
was chosen include a description of
computer software and parameters
used.		 a according to the weathering and mineralisation envelopes.
Drill sample data were fagged by the mineralisation and
a_The availability of check estimates,
_previous estimates and/or mine
production records and whether the		 weathering domain envelopes, with variables MZONE and
WEATH used. Drillholes were sampled at 1 m intervals and
the drill samples were accordingly composited to 1 m lengths.
Mineral Resource estimate takes Composited sample data were statistically reviewed to determine
appropriate account of such data. appropriate top-cuts, with top-cuts applied for Zn, Cu, Pb,
a_The assumptions made regarding_ Ag and Au where required. Log probability plots were used to
recovery of by-products. determine the top-cuts, and the very high-grade samples were
a_Estimation of deleterious elements_ reviewed in Datamine by the Competent Person to determine if
or other non-grade variables of they were clustered with other high-grade samples.
economic significance (eg sulphur for
acid mine drainage characterisation).		 a Grades interpolated were Cu, Zn, Au, Ag, Co, Mo, Sb, As, S and Fe.
a_In the case of block model interpo-
_lation, the block size in relation to		 a Sample populations were split by the Cu and Zn mineralisation
domains, as supported by a statistical analysis of assay data.
the average sample spacing and the a The composited drill samples were input into variogram modelling.
search employed. Downhole and directional variograms were modelled for Zn and
a_Any assumptions behind modelling of_ Cu within the combined mineralisation domains and by weath-
selective mining units. ering profle. Moderate relative nugget effects were modelled,
a_Any assumptions about correlation_ with short ranges approximately 50 m for Zn and Cu.
between variables.
a_Description of how the geological_
interpretation was used to control the
resource estimates.
a_Discussion of basis for using or not_
using grade cutting or capping.
a_The process of validation, the_
checking process used, the
comparison of model data to drill hole
data, and use of reconciliation data if
available.		 a Grade interpolation used Ordinary Kriging (OK) for the grade
variables. All subblocks were assigned the grade of their parent
block. Cell discretisation was used in each estimate. Sample
search ellipses used variable radii length, with the Cu and Zn
search volumes using of 60 m by 30 m by 20 m (perpendicular to
strike) was used, with a minimum of 8 samples and maximum of 24
samples used to interpolate grade into any one block. A maximum
of 4 samples per drill hole was used for grade interpolation. Search
radii were increased, and the minimum number of minimum
samples reduced in subsequent sample searches if cells were not
interpolated in the frst pass. Octant searches were not used.
a Grades were estimated into the waste domains using IDS.
a The interpolated grades were validated by way of review of
cross sections (block model and drill samples presented with
same colour legend); swath plots, and comparison of mean
grades from drillhole data with block model grades.
a The Competent Person considers the procedures used to construct
the block model and interpolate grades are appropriate for the style
of mineralisation and refect industry accepted practices.
Moisture a_Whether the tonnages are estimated_ a Tonnages are estimated on a dry basis.
on a dry basis or with natural mois-
ture, and the method of determination
of the moisture content.
Cut-off a_The basis of the adopted cut-off_ a The Sandiego Mineral Resource is reported above a cut-off grade
parameters grade(s) or quality parameters applied. of 3 % Zn for the Zn and Mixed Zn-Cu zones, and above a cut-off
of 0.8 % Cu for the Cu zone. The cut-off grades are considered
suitable by the Competent Person for the method of mining
considered to be appropriate for Sandiego.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE 45

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Mining factors a_Assumptions made regarding_ a Previous owners of the Project, Anglo Australian Resources (AAR)
or assump-
tions		 possible mining methods, minimum
mining dimensions and internal (or, if
applicable, external) mining dilution.
It is always necessary as part of the
process of determining reasonable
prospects for eventual economic
extraction to consider potential		 commissioned a preliminary mining assessment of the Sandiego
and Onedin deposits. This study established 2 potential mining
operations: Underground only at both Sandiego and Onedin;
and an open pit operation at Onedin. No major mining problems
were identifed in this study, however, further work was subject to
metallurgical recoveries.
mining methods, but the assumptions
made regarding mining methods
and parameters when estimating
Mineral Resources may not always
be rigorous. Where this is the case,
this should be reported with an		 a In 2008 internal mining study work by AAR focussed on
underground mining of the sulphide and transition zones at
Sandiego, with construction of a 500tpa processing plant (using
fotation technologies) with a 4–5-year operating life with Onedin
development having the capacity to extend project life to 8 years
explanation of the basis of the mining mining Sandiego transition and sulphide ore. A conceptual study
assumptions made. was also completed on open pit mining of Onedin based on
conceptual metallurgical recoveries.
a In 2010 AAR commissioned a preliminary geotechnical model
for Sandiego based on geotechnical diamond drilling results.
The geotechnical assessment involved construction of a 3D
Mining Rock Mass Model for the prospect and determination
of preliminary geotechnical parameters for use in mine design
studies. Raw data for the project comprised geotechnical and
structural logging of 23 diamond holes. For the underground
project, the rock mass has been classifed into three geotechnical
domains based on estimated Q’ values. Preliminary inter ramp
slope angles (excluding ramps) for the prospect were developed
for use is pit design studies.
a In 2011 AAR commissioned a scoping study on mining the
Sandiego deposit. It concluded that: Exploitation of the Sandiego
deposit by open pit and underground mining methods using an
on-site concentrator and off-site smelting is potentially viable.
Copper concentrates and zinc concentrated produced would be
trucked to a suitable port facility such as Wyndham and stored
until shipped to overseas smelters. A PFS level study
was recommended.
a No further mining studies for Sandiego have been completed
to date, however, AKN has identifed the greater likelihood for
mining is on the basis of an open pit operation at Onedin and
an underground mine at Sandiego. For this reason, the different
cut-off grades have been applied to the two deposits in the
resource estimate.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE 46

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Metallurgical a_The basis for assumptions or_ a Signifcant metallurgical testwork has been undertaken on the
factors or predictions regarding metallurgical Halls Creek deposits by various explorers since the 1970s. Early
assumptions amenability. It is always necessary as
part of the process of determining
reasonable prospects for eventual
economic extraction to consider		 work was effectively superseded by a major metallurgical testwork
campaign undertaken by AAR from 2006. The metallurgical
testwork established that saleable copper and zinc concentrates
potential metallurgical methods,
but the assumptions regarding
metallurgical treatment processes		 could be produced from the sulphide mineralisation at Sandiego
and Onedin but work on the transitional material (using conven-
tional fotation techniques) was challenging. The 2007 testwork
and parameters made when reporting included 96 metallurgical sample tests on different ore types from
Mineral Resources may not always be
rigorous. Where this is the case, this
should be reported with an explana-
tion of the basis of the metallurgical		 a Onedin and Sandiego to underpin a mineral processing fowsheet
for economic study work.
In 2009, AAR commissioned a review of the more than
assumptions made. 300 metallurgical tests that had then been completed over the
various ore-types at Sandiego and Onedin, with a focus on the
application of fotation recovery techniques. This study concluded:
The metallurgy of the Sandiego transition and primary zones, whilst
complex, is amenable to established fotation technology. The
Onedin primary zone is amenable to the same fotation technology
and can be processed through the same plant with minor modif-
cations. The Onedin transition zone contains most of it’s value in
the form of zinc oxide minerals and is not amenable to conventional
fotation recovery but extraction by hydrometallurgy is possible.
The Onedin oxide zone contains copper in the form of malachite
which may be amenable to hydrometallurgy. Conventional fotation
fowsheets were designed for processing the Onedin and Sandiego
sulphide mineralisation. Project economics are very sensitive to
metal recoveries and the grade of concentrate achieved. The
O’Brien study recommended: Further testwork focussed on being
as near to actual plant operating conditions as possible. Further
testwork should encompass a continuous pilot scale test facility.
a AAR engaged several metallurgical/mineral processing specialists
to review the possibilities of implementing novel treatment
processes to treat the problematic transitional and oxide ores of
Halls Creek during period 2009 to 2012. Meaningful trials recom-
mended were not implemented. No further metallurgical test work
was undertaken since 2012, before the recent commencement
by AKN of its initial metallurgical testwork program on the Onedin
oxide and transitional ores.
Environmental a_Assumptions made regarding possible_ a The project is not located in an environmentally sensitive area.
factors or
assumptions		 waste and process residue disposal
options. It is always necessary as
part of the process of determining
reasonable prospects for eventual		 Several scoping studies have been undertaken, with no major
environmental or other factors identifed which would prevent
the project from proceeding.
economic extraction to consider the a It has been assumed that environmental factors can be effectively
potential environmental impacts of managed to allow the project to be bought into production.
the mining and processing operation.
While at this stage the determination
of potential environmental impacts,
particularly for a greenfields project,
may not always be well advanced,		 a Anthropological, ethnographic surveys and environmental surveys
have been undertaken prior to surface disturbance associated
with exploration activities, with clearance being achieved over
the majority of the deposit footprints. Identifed sites have been
the status of early consideration of placed in the public record.
these potential environmental impacts
should be reported. Where these
aspects have not been considered
this should be reported with an
explanation of the environmental
assumptions made.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE 47

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Bulk Density a_Whether assumed or determined. If_ a The method for density measurements is discussed in Section 2
assumed, the basis for the assump-
tions. If determined, the method used,
whether wet or dry, the frequency
of the measurements, the nature,		 a “Reporting of Exploration Results’.
Diamond core billets from earlier drilling programmes were
wrapped in cling flm prior to immersion in water to prevent flling
size and representativeness of the of cavities with water.
samples. a A drill hole fle was generated in Datamine capturing the density
a_The bulk density for bulk material must_ data, and this drill fle was fagged by weathering and minerali-
have been measured by methods
that adequately account for void
spaces (vugs, porosity, etc), moisture
and differences between rock and
alteration zones within the deposit.
a_Discuss assumptions for bulk density_		 sation domain in the same manner as the drill hole assays. The
fagged density population was statistically analysed, with average
density values determined for each mineralisation zone within
each weathering zone. The following density values were applied
per combination of domain:
estimates used in the evaluation a Oxide zone: Zn zone (Density = 3.1 t/m3); Cu zone (3.1); Overlap
process of the different materials. zone (3.1).
a Transitional zone: Zn zone (3.18); Cu zone (3.22); Overlap zone
(3.24).
a Fresh zone: Zn zone (3.33); Cu zone (3.24); Overlap zone (3.34).
a The Competent Person considers the procedures used to
measure sample bulk density, and the density values assigned
to the Mineral Resource, are appropriate for the style of
mineralisation.
Classifcation a_The basis for the classification of_ a The Mineral Resource has been classifed following due consider-
the Mineral Resources into varying ation of all criteria contained in Section 1, Section 2 and Section 3
confidence categories. of JORC 2012 Table 1.
a_Whether appropriate account has_
been taken of all relevant factors (ie
relative confidence in tonnage/grade
estimations, reliability of input data,
confidence in continuity of geology
and metal values, quality, quantity and		 a The Mineral Resources were classifed based upon drill hole
spacing, quality of sampling and sample analyses, quantity of
density measurements, and the relative confdence in the geological
interpretation. This Mineral Resource is supported by a high level
of confdence in the geological interpretations, suffcient to assume
distribution of the data). geological and grade continuity to satisfy an Indicated classifcation.
a_Whether the result appropriately_
reflects the Competent Person’s view
of the deposit.		 a All blocks within the Sandiego Mineral Resource are classifed
as a combination of Indicated (RESCAT = 2) and Inferred
(RESCAT=3).
a Polygons were digitised in the longitudinal section of the mineral-
isation to defne the classifcation envelopes, and a cookie cutter
approach was used to stamp the classifcation schema onto the
block model.
a Waste blocks are recorded as unclassifed (RESCAT=4).
a The fnal classifcation strategy and results appropriately refect the
Competent Person’s view of the deposit.
Audits or a_The results of any audits or reviews of_ a The Mineral Resource estimate was internally peer reviewed by CSA
Reviews Mineral Resource estimates. Global. CSA Global reviewed the data collection, QAQC, geological
modelling, statistical analyses, grade interpolation, density measure-
ments and resource classifcation strategies. The Competent Person
relies upon the opinions of the peer reviewers when classifying the
Mineral Resource, and is satisfed that the reviews were impartial
and provided useful critique where necessary.
a No other audits or reviews are known to have occurred.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE 48

==> picture [220 x 97] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [23 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Commentary
Discussion a_Where appropriate a statement of_ a Relevant tonnages and grade above nominated cut-off grades
of relative the relative accuracy and confidence for Cu and Zn are provided in the CSA Global (now ERM) Mineral
accuracy /
confdence		 level in the Mineral Resource
estimate using an approach or
procedure deemed appropriate by
the Competent Person. For example,
the application of statistical or		 Resource report. Tonnages were calculated by fltering all blocks
above the cut-off grade and sub-setting the resultant data into
bins by mineralisation domain. The volumes of all the collated
blocks were multiplied by the dry density value to derive the
geostatistical procedures to quantify tonnages.
the relative accuracy of the resource
within stated confidence limits, or,
if such an approach is not deemed		 a The Mineral Resource is a local estimate, whereby the drill hole
data was geologically domained above nominated cut-off grades.
appropriate, a qualitative discussion
of the factors that could affect the
relative accuracy and confidence of
the estimate.
a_The statement should specify_		 a The Mineral Resource does not provide a calculated tonnage and
grade, rather it provides the reader with estimated ‘median’ values
about which can be inferred a range based upon the resource
classifcation.
whether it relates to global or local
estimates, and, if local, state the
relevant tonnages, which should be
relevant to technical and economic
evaluation. Documentation should
include assumptions made and the
procedures used.
a_These statements of relative accuracy_
and confidence of the estimate should
be compared with production data,
where available.

==> picture [41 x 106] intentionally omitted <==

MARKET UPDATE 49

More from AUKING MINING LIMITED

Declaration of Voting Results & Voting Rights Announcements 2026
May 26
Share Issue/Capital Change 2026
May 25
Share Issue/Capital Change 2026
May 25
Share Issue/Capital Change 2026
May 25
Major Shareholding Notification 2026
May 17
Share Issue/Capital Change 2026
May 12
Director's Dealing 2026
May 12
Share Issue/Capital Change 2026
May 12
Regulatory Filings 2026
May 11
Share Issue/Capital Change 2026
May 7
View all filings →